From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10F9C433DF for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 14:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C1520643 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 14:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=szeredi.hu header.i=@szeredi.hu header.b="XHwGX1Xa" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726667AbgENO4A (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 10:56:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39570 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726281AbgENO4A (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 10:56:00 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x642.google.com (mail-ej1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::642]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C75EAC061A0C for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x642.google.com with SMTP id x20so2995335ejb.11 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:55:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=szeredi.hu; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mt4USsrPeAyCCKAdxZFCQYz+CwMakof0aOvagpM9z+o=; b=XHwGX1XaSQ5wh/Z0em+1CXAOr527IjSrMavRLreC9IKJriA2B6xXD8gqz25mPJUHFC QAekMp61OGmcVMUyzmOrwbEsdtlEwSwj7hNYZ657UnPEqh59cEwfoI2r/3X5fEBIgQgP QMqdcZQlL8Eo9hQbiiGcghcb36HxfG8505ZeI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mt4USsrPeAyCCKAdxZFCQYz+CwMakof0aOvagpM9z+o=; b=fPVYg2PkGZIKIOMSdDuPDYTCYMZ2t0eM5IiBF43nFyszRFMFEKRKIz7cXY6Od/7FpR z8QM5azyKWU/3Xay9o97p+kAO2GFk56GTD2k4gQN3MJ7szCE3QCvaMeBgndahb1XjufW 2DhL48I5DCnrT50D7BaejtacixY/H+snt3kEIYdGrivsp3ZBLgItMnXBMXiIcV3xuvMr M2Y4gZMptTMKvTUBLsWrUaJcwh+UyMquCT5h0FiiBzZ0WIutl7v8kih+2ybwZ7ATdnAL T9htaH3RpV0q9it9n5+WQ8H08rZlSHZVsVycwHU/YDv/k0H1b5u+TNwVM6dT+YtvT8rq iW3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531dfgXF71ZWSa1dr/xk4U9VoeaBCh3WOpbaywaTYsjNBVkV37tQ IU0rO/LhzCgBBcrnfMGoZb2I2WsXYUxY1GsLpSrfMg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJznld4Pwu9shBGKG9gqs0n2GjIcLnB9EImyMfp76wPV4nSsASgZ3dFfmQOKS2J7iVj4tmOCK6I+6vAkN47+2YQ= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:29d9:: with SMTP id y25mr4121892eje.198.1589468158535; Thu, 14 May 2020 07:55:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200505095915.11275-1-mszeredi@redhat.com> <20200513194850.GY23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20200513194850.GY23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 16:55:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] vfs patch queue To: Al Viro Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 9:48 PM Al Viro 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 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