From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
linux-aio <linux-aio@kvack.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/18] io_uring: add file set registration
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 20:08:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJfpegvkC=jinq6_XW_88vMfsNOHDNOzTsKw1YJ2HBmqffX5JQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190207162605.GD2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 5:26 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> I'm trying to put together some formal description of what's going on in there.
> Another question, BTW: updates of user->unix_inflight would seem to be movable
> into the callers of unix_{not,}inflight(). Any objections against lifting
> it into unix_{attach,detach}_fds()? We do, after all, have fp->count right
> there, so what's the point incrementing/decrementing the sucker one-by-one?
> _And_ we are checking it right there (in too_many_unix_fds() called from
> unix_attach_fds())...
I see no issues with that.
Also shouldn't the rlimit check be made against user->unix_inflight +
fp->count? Althought I'm not quite following if fp->user can end up
different from current_user() and what should happen in that case...
Thanks,
Miklos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-07 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190129192702.3605-1-axboe@kernel.dk>
[not found] ` <20190129192702.3605-14-axboe@kernel.dk>
2019-01-30 1:29 ` [PATCH 13/18] io_uring: add file set registration Jann Horn
2019-01-30 15:35 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-04 2:56 ` Al Viro
2019-02-05 2:19 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-05 17:57 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-05 19:08 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-06 0:27 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-06 1:01 ` Al Viro
2019-02-06 17:56 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-07 4:05 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 16:14 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-07 16:30 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 16:35 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-07 16:51 ` Al Viro
2019-02-06 0:56 ` Al Viro
2019-02-06 13:41 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-07 4:00 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 9:22 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-07 13:31 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 14:20 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-07 15:20 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 15:27 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-02-07 16:26 ` Al Viro
2019-02-07 19:08 ` Miklos Szeredi [this message]
2019-02-07 18:45 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-07 18:58 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-11 15:55 ` Jonathan Corbet
2019-02-11 17:35 ` Al Viro
2019-02-11 20:33 ` Jonathan Corbet
2019-01-23 15:35 [PATCHSET v7] io_uring IO interface Jens Axboe
2019-01-23 15:35 ` [PATCH 13/18] io_uring: add file set registration Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJfpegvkC=jinq6_XW_88vMfsNOHDNOzTsKw1YJ2HBmqffX5JQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=avi@scylladb.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).