On Mon, 2022-01-31 at 17:28 -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > On 1/27/22 11:53, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > On Tue, 2022-01-25 at 17:46 -0500, Stefan Berger wrote: > >> From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Enable multiple instances of securityfs by keying each instance with a > >> pointer to the user namespace it belongs to. > >> > >> Since we do not need the pinning of the filesystem for the virtualization > >> case, limit the usage of simple_pin_fs() and simpe_release_fs() to the > >> case when the init_user_ns is active. This simplifies the cleanup for the > >> virtualization case where usage of securityfs_remove() to free dentries > >> is not needed anymore. > > Could you add a sentence here explaining why securityfs_remove() isn't > > needed in the virtualization case? > > At this point the reason is that simple_pin_fs() is not used for the > virtualization case. > > Maybe it should say: ... to free dentries is *therefore* not needed anymore. Probably it's obvious, but I was looking for something along the lines of, "The securityfs file or directory is automatically removed based on reference count." No need to update it. thanks, Mimi
