Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 22:23:50 +0000
From: Al Viro <>
To: Linus Torvalds <>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <>,
	LKML <>,
	Kernel Hardening <>,
	Linux API <>,
	Linux FS Devel <>,
	Linux Security Module <>,
	Akinobu Mita <>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	Daniel Micay <>,
	Djalal Harouni <>,
	"Dmitry V . Levin" <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>,
	"J . Bruce Fields" <>,
	Jeff Layton <>,
	Jonathan Corbet <>, Kees Cook <>,
	Oleg Nesterov <>,
	Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 01:30:11PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 9:55 PM Al Viro <> wrote:
> >
> > What I don't understand is the insistence on getting those dentries
> > via dcache lookups.
> I don't think that's an "insistence", it's more of a "historical
> behavior" together with "several changes over the years to deal with
> dentry-level cleanups and updates".
> > _IF_ we are willing to live with cacheline
> > contention (on ->d_lock of root dentry, if nothing else), why not
> > do the following:
> >         * put all dentries of such directories ([0-9]* and [0-9]*/task/*)
> > into a list anchored in task_struct; have non-counting reference to
> > task_struct stored in them (might simplify part of get_proc_task() users,
> Hmm.
> Right now I don't think we actually create any dentries at all for the
> short-lived process case.
> Wouldn't your suggestion make fork/exit rather worse?
> Or would you create the dentries dynamically still at lookup time, and
> then attach them to the process at that point?
> What list would you use for the dentry chaining? Would you play games
> with the dentry hashing, and "hash" them off the process, and never
> hit in the lookup cache?

I'd been thinking of ->d_fsdata pointing to a structure with list_head
and a (non-counting) task_struct pointer for those guys.  Allocated
on lookup, of course (as well as readdir ;-/) and put on the list
at the same time.

IOW, for short-lived process we simply have an empty (h)list anchored
in task_struct and that's it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.