diff for duplicates of <1505466296.4200.86.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index bc4052d..3897a10 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -6,21 +6,21 @@ On Thu, 2017-09-14 at 22:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Why should a read need exclusive access? You'd think shared is sufficient. -True, reading a file shouldn't require an exclusive lock. ?The +True, reading a file shouldn't require an exclusive lock. The exclusive lock is taken to prevent the file from changing while the file hash is being calculated. > But regardless, it needs *explanation*. -Agreed. ?A fuller explanation was included in the cover letter that -should have also been included in the patch description. ?The +Agreed. A fuller explanation was included in the cover letter that +should have also been included in the patch description. The following is taken from the cover letter: With the introduction of IMA-appraisal and the need to write file hashes as security xattrs, IMA needed to take the global i_mutex -lock.??process_measurement() took the iint->mutex first and then +lock. process_measurement() took the iint->mutex first and then the i_mutex, while setxattr, chmod and chown took the locks in -reverse order.??To resolve this potential deadlock, the iint->mutex +reverse order. To resolve this potential deadlock, the iint->mutex was removed. Some filesystems have recently replaced their filesystem dependent @@ -40,9 +40,9 @@ Mimi > says it is > > So no, this needs more work. ->? ->?????Linus ->? +> +> Linus +> > > On Sep 14, 2017 21:59, "Mimi Zohar" <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: @@ -386,8 +386,3 @@ Mimi > > 2.7.4 > > > > - --- -To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in -the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org -More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index fa09697..cf96508 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -1,10 +1,33 @@ "ref\01505451494-30228-1-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com\0" "ref\01505451494-30228-4-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com\0" "ref\0CA+55aFwVujvsdaq09O216u-uBbBbo5i_1d6aw3ksottR_uiJ6w@mail.gmail.com\0" - "From\0zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar)\0" - "Subject\0[PATCH 3/3] ima: use fs method to read integrity data\0" + "From\0Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\0" + "Subject\0Re: [PATCH 3/3] ima: use fs method to read integrity data\0" "Date\0Fri, 15 Sep 2017 05:04:56 -0400\0" - "To\0linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org\0" + "To\0Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>\0" + "Cc\0Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@kernel.org>" + Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com> + David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> + Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> + Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> + Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> + Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> + Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org> + Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> + Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> + Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp> + Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com> + Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> + Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca> + Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> + Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@versity.com> + linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org + linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net + James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> + Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> + Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> + Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> + " Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Thu, 2017-09-14 at 22:50 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:\n" @@ -15,21 +38,21 @@ "\n" "> Why should a read need exclusive access? You'd think shared is sufficient.\n" "\n" - "True, reading a file shouldn't require an exclusive lock. ?The\n" + "True, reading a file shouldn't require an exclusive lock. \302\240The\n" "exclusive lock is taken to prevent the file from changing while the\n" "file hash is being calculated.\n" "\n" "> But regardless, it needs *explanation*.\n" "\n" - "Agreed. ?A fuller explanation was included in the cover letter that\n" - "should have also been included in the patch description. ?The\n" + "Agreed. \302\240A fuller explanation was included in the cover letter that\n" + "should have also been included in the patch description. \302\240The\n" "following is taken from the cover letter:\n" "\n" "With the introduction of IMA-appraisal and the need to write file\n" "hashes as security xattrs, IMA needed to take the global i_mutex\n" - "lock.??process_measurement() took the iint->mutex first and then\n" + "lock.\302\240\302\240process_measurement() took the iint->mutex first and then\n" "the i_mutex, while setxattr, chmod and chown took the locks in\n" - "reverse order.??To resolve this potential deadlock, the iint->mutex\n" + "reverse order.\302\240\302\240To resolve this potential deadlock, the iint->mutex\n" "was removed.\n" "\n" "Some filesystems have recently replaced their filesystem dependent\n" @@ -49,9 +72,9 @@ "> says it is\n" "> \n" "> So no, this needs more work.\n" - ">?\n" - ">?????Linus\n" - ">?\n" + ">\302\240\n" + ">\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240Linus\n" + ">\302\240\n" "\n" "> \n" "> On Sep 14, 2017 21:59, \"Mimi Zohar\" <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:\n" @@ -394,11 +417,6 @@ "> > --\n" "> > 2.7.4\n" "> >\n" - "> >\n" - "\n" - "--\n" - "To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe linux-security-module\" in\n" - "the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org\n" - More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html + > > -008b77f25a1c0548caad55af136ca8ef6660114d6321165e6ac99ac4932b5e41 +ddddfadbaedc303c87cd5d3dadcb6d62c5c26e93f3d4f379748efcdf86b8e4ea
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.