lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:14:53 +0100
From:	Jörn Engel <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <>, Christoph Hellwig <>,
	David Miller <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,,
	" >> Kernel Testers List" 
	<>, Mike Galbraith <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Linux Netdev List <>,
	Christoph Lameter <>,, Al Viro <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] fs: new_inode_single() and iput_single()

On Sat, 29 November 2008 09:45:09 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> +void iput_single(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> +	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&inode->i_count)) {
> +		destroy_inode(inode);
> +		percpu_counter_dec(&nr_inodes);
> +	}
> +}

I wonder if it is possible to avoid the atomic_dec_and_test() here, at
least in the common case, and combine it with the atomic_dec_and_test()
of the dentry.  A quick look at fs/inode.c indicates that inode->i_count
may never get changed for a SINGLE inode, except during creation or

It might be worth to
- remove the conditional from iput_single() and measure that it makes a
- poison SINGLE inodes with some value and
- put a BUG_ON() in __iget() that checks for the poison value.

I _think_ the BUG_ON() is unnecessary, but at least my brain is not
sufficient to convince me.  Can inotify somehow get a hold of a socket?
Or dquot (how insane would that be?)


Mac is for working,
Linux is for Networking,
Windows is for Solitaire!
-- stolen from dc
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists