Re: [PATCH][RFC] get rid of busy-wait in shrink_dcache_tree()

Al Viro
2026-01-24T20:26:56Z

On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 11:32:59AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 at 10:41, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > In fact, RANDSTRUCT is so broken in general that we actually taint the
> > > kernel if you enable that crazy option in the first place. So no,
> > > "what if somebody enables it on random things" is not even remotely
> > > worth worrying about.
> >
> > Very much agreed, but we *do* have that on e.g. struct path (two pointers),
> > as well as struct inode, struct file, struct mount, etc. As far as VFS goes,
> > those are core data structures...
>
> I certainly wouldn't mind if we remove the 'struct path' one in
> particular. It's insanely pointless to do randstruct on two fields.

<wry>
Frankly, each time I talk to these folks I keep hearing "Every bit
is wanted/Every bit is good/Every bit is needed/In your neighborhood"
set to the obvious tune...