Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753929Ab3EUWiM (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2013 18:38:12 -0400 Received: from mail-ve0-f171.google.com ([209.85.128.171]:47094 "EHLO mail-ve0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753742Ab3EUWhv (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2013 18:37:51 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20130521223453.GY25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20130521223453.GY25399@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 15:37:50 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 47KGSKNbgPUbiyt846OT1oMGca4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Stupid VFS name lookup interface.. From: Linus Torvalds To: Al Viro Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 924 Lines: 24 On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > In principle, yes, but... I wonder if those two cases are actually > safe (especially ncpfs) right now. Now I can agree that that may well be an issue. I don't think my patch makes anything worse (because if the inode isn't stable, we could have hit the before/after cases before, and the new NULL case is trivial to handle). But I'm certainly not going to claim that ncpfs doesn't already have a race as-is. Just claiming that I wouldn't have made it worse ;) > Let me dig around in that code a bit, OK? Sure, no problem. This would be 3.11 material anyway, I'd expect. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/