Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 23:07:58 +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 0/7] proc: Dentry flushing without proc_mnt

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 03:02:22PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:48 PM Eric W. Biederman
> <> wrote:
> >
> > Linus, does this approach look like something you can stand?
> A couple of worries, although one of them seem to have already been
> resolved by Al.
> I think the real gatekeeper should be Al in general.  But other than
> the small comments I had, I think this might work just fine.
> Al?

I'll need to finish RTFS there; I have initially misread that patch,
actually - Eric _is_ using that thing both for those directories
and for sysctl inodes.  And the prototype for that machinery (the
one he'd pulled from proc_sysctl.c) is playing with pinning superblocks
way too much; for per-pid directories that's not an issue, but
for sysctl table removal you are very likely to hit a bunch of
evictees on the same superblock...

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.