From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20385C433E1 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 16:57:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0948E20B1F for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 16:57:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726073AbgGSQ5v (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:57:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55344 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725783AbgGSQ5v (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:57:51 -0400 Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2002:c35c:fd02::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01199C0619D2; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 09:57:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jxCdG-00G0xu-6G; Sun, 19 Jul 2020 16:57:46 +0000 Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2020 17:57:46 +0100 From: Al Viro To: "Xu, Yanfei" Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] userfaultfd: avoid the duplicated release for userfaultfd_ctx Message-ID: <20200719165746.GJ2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20200714161203.31879-1-yanfei.xu@windriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 09:58:34PM +0800, Xu, Yanfei wrote: > ping Al Viro > > Could you please help to review this patch? Thanks a lot. That's -next, right? As for the patch itself... Frankly, Daniel's patch looks seriously wrong. * why has O_CLOEXEC been quietly smuggled in? It's a userland ABI change, for fsck sake... * the double-put you've spotted * the whole out: thing - just make it if (IS_ERR(file)) { userfaultfd_ctx_put(ctx); return PTR_ERR(file); } and be done with that.