On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 5:18 PM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > +static inline void makeatomicname(struct filename *name)
> > +{
> > + VFS_BUG_ON(IS_ERR_OR_NULL(name));
> > + /*
> > + * The name can legitimately already be atomic if it was cached by audit.
> > + * If switching the refcount to atomic, we need not to know we are the
> > + * only non-atomic user.
> > + */
> > + VFS_BUG_ON(name->owner != current && !name->is_atomic);
> > + /*
> > + * Don't bother branching, this is a store to an already dirtied cacheline.
> > + */
> > + name->is_atomic = true;
> > +}
>
> Should this not depend on audit being enabled? io_uring without audit is
> fine.
>
I thought about it, but then I got worried about transitions from
disabled to enabled -- will they suddenly start looking here? Should
this test for audit_enabled, audit_dummy_context() or something else?
I did not want to bother analyzing this.
I'll note though this would be an optimization on top of the current
code, so I don't think it *blocks* the patch.
--
Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>
