Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230806230627.1394689-1-mjguzik@gmail.com> <87o7jidqlg.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <CAHk-=whk-8Pv5YXH4jNfyAf2xiQCGCUVyBWw71qJEafn4mT6vw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGudoHE5UDj0Y7fY=gicOq8Je=e1MX+5VWo04qoDRpHRG03fFg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHE5UDj0Y7fY=gicOq8Je=e1MX+5VWo04qoDRpHRG03fFg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 8 Aug 2023 10:18:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj+Uu+=iUZLc+MfOBKgRoyM56c0z0ustZKru0We9os63A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: use __fput_sync in close(2)
To:     Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 at 10:10, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Few hours ago I sent another version which very closely resembles what
> you did :)
> 2 main differences:
> - i somehow missed close_fd_get_file so I hacked my own based on close_fd
> - you need to whack the kthread assert in __fput_sync

Good call on teh __fput_sync() test.

That BUG_ON() made sense ten years ago when this was all re-organized,
not so much now.

> I'm offended you ask, it's all in my opening e-mail.

Heh. I wasn't actually cc'd on that, so I'm going by context and then
peeking at web links..

             Linus