Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Date:   Sat, 2 Dec 2023 21:45:02 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] fs: Add DEFINE_FREE for struct inode
Message-ID: <20231202214502.GS38156@ZenIV>
References: <20231202211535.work.571-kees@kernel.org>
 <20231202212217.243710-3-keescook@chromium.org>
 <20231202212846.GQ38156@ZenIV>
 <202312021331.D2DFBF153@keescook>
 <20231202214212.GR38156@ZenIV>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231202214212.GR38156@ZenIV>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 09:42:12PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:

> I'll poke around and see what I can suggest; said that, one thing I have
> spotted there on the quick look is that you are exposing hashed dentry associated
> with your inode before you set its ->i_private.

... and on the second look, no, you do not do anything of that sort.
My apologies...