On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 01:45:52AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 11:37:32PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > > For debugfs it's clearly "use default ->evict_inode(), have explicit > > ->destroy_inode() using free_inode_nonrcu()" - there we have nothing > > else done in ->evict_inode() and kfree is obviously safe in softirq. > > I'll post that (or push to vfs.git#fixes), along with minimal fixes > > for other 3. If bpf_any_put() is softirq-safe, we'll have the full > > set for -stable and the rest could be done on top of that. > > > > Won't solve the documetation problem, unfortunately ;-/ > > Posted; all of those (as well as Daniel's bpf patch) are Cc:stable > fodder. Documentation is still, er, deficient... ... and unfortunately there are two more, exactly like debugfs - securityfs and apparmorfs, found while sorting out the series for separate rcu-delayed counterpart of ->destroy_inode(). Both are in vfs.git#fixes. Which way should that go - directly or via linux-security.git? Both are stable fodder, in theory, but much harder to hit than their ubifs/debugfs/bpf counterparts...
