Re: [PATCH v12 10/12] namei: aggressively check for nd->root escape on ".." resolution
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 10/12] namei: aggressively check for nd->root escape on ".." resolution
- From: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2019 23:31:16 +0100
- Cc: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>, Shuah Khan <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx>, Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@xxxxxxxx>, David Drysdale <drysdale@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chanho Min <chanho.min@xxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx>, Aleksa Sarai <asarai@xxxxxxx>, Linux Containers <containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, alpha <linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux API <linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-arch <linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-m68k <linux-m68k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-parisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390 <linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux-sh list <linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <CAHk-=wgcJq21Hydh7Tx5-o8empoPp7ULDBw0Am-du_Pa+fcftQ@mail.gmail.com>
- Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
- References: <CAHk-=wgcJq21Hydh7Tx5-o8empoPp7ULDBw0Am-du_Pa+fcftQ@mail.gmail.com> <20190904201933.10736-1-cyphar@cyphar.com> <20190904201933.10736-11-cyphar@cyphar.com> <CAHk-=wiod1rQMU+6Zew=cLE8uX4tUdf42bM5eKngMnNVS2My7g@mail.gmail.com> <20190904214856.vnvom7h5xontvngq@yavin.dot.cyphar.com>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hinting to userspace to do a retry (with -EAGAIN as you mention in your
> > other mail) wouldn't be a bad thing at all, though you'd almost
> > certainly get quite a few spurious -EAGAINs -- &{mount,rename}_lock are
> > global for the entire machine, after all.
>
> I'd hope that we have some future (possibly very long-term)
> alternative that is not quite system-global, but yes, right now they
> are.
It ought to be reasonably easy to make them per-sb at least, I think. We
don't allow cross-super rename, right?
David
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]
