On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 9:48 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 09:47:07AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 11:59 AM Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Al, > > > > > > Can you please apply the following patches? > > > > Ping? Could you please have a look at these patches? > > > > - /proc/mounts cursor is almost half the total lines changed, and that > > one was already pretty damn well reviewed by you > > > > - unprivileged whiteout one was approved by the security guys > > > > - aio fsync one is a real bug, please comment on whether the patch is > > acceptable or should I work around it in fuse > > > > - STATX_MNT_ID extension is a no brainer, the other one may or may not > > be useful, that's arguable... > > > > - the others are not important, but I think useful > > > > - and I missed one (faccess2); amending to patch series > > I can live with that, modulo couple of trivial nits. Nits from you and Christoph fixed, Reviewed-by: tags added, and force pushed to: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/vfs.git#for-viro As I've said, I'm not sure what are the constraints for spinlock holding. We could easily switch to a mutex and that would solve the inability to schedule, but would it make a real difference to the damage a malicious user can do? Thanks, Miklos
