From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] tty: stop abusing file->f_u.fu_list
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 21:39:30 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100605113930.GH26335@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100604183934.GA2309@infradead.org>
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 02:39:34PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The ttry code currently abuses the file anchor for the per-sb file list
> to track instances of a given tty. But there's no good reason for
> that, we can just install a proxy object in file->private that gets
> added to the list and points to the tty and keep the list away from
> VFS internals.
Well thanks for this. Yes it is an obviously nicer way to do it, so
tty doesn't have to know what vfs uses files list for.
> Note that I've just if 0'd the selinux mess poking into it. While we
> could trivially port it to the new code by making the tty_private
> structure public this code is just too revolting to be kept around.
> It would never have been there anyway if a person with some amount of
> clue had ever reviewed the selinux code. And no, it's not just the
> tty portion, the rest of that function is just as bad.
Why is it a mess? Just because of the conceptual nastiness of checking
a tty object via a random one of its inodes? How would be a better way
to do this?
I think for a first pass, a simple conversion for all code would be good
for me because then it stops blocking the scaling patch. (and it's
more bisectable).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-05 11:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-04 6:43 [patch 0/4] Initial vfs scalability patches again Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 1/4] fs: cleanup files_lock Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 14:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 14:39 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-04 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 18:39 ` [PATCH, RFC] tty: stop abusing file->f_u.fu_list Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 19:35 ` Al Viro
2010-06-05 11:39 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-06-08 5:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 2/4] lglock: introduce special lglock and brlock spin locks Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 7:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-04 14:13 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 14:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-04 15:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-04 15:12 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 3/4] fs: scale files_lock Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 4/4] fs: brlock vfsmount_lock Nick Piggin
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=20100605113930.GH26335@laptop \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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 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.