Re: [RFC][PATCHSET] sanitized pathwalk machinery (v3)

Eric W. Biederman
2020-03-03T23:51:01Z

Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> writes:

> On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 04:34:06PM -0600, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 3:51 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > Extended since the last repost. The branch is in #work.dotdot;
>> > #work.do_last is its beginning (about 2/3 of the total), slightly
>> > reworked since the last time.
>>
>> I'm traveling, so only a quick read-through.
>>
>> One request: can you add the total diffstat to the cover letter (along
>> with what you used as a base)?
>
> Sure, no problem (and the base is still -rc1)
>
>> I did apply it to a branch just to look
>> at it more closely, so I can see the final diffstat that way:
>>
>> Documentation/filesystems/path-lookup.rst | 7 +-
>> fs/autofs/dev-ioctl.c | 6 +-
>> fs/internal.h | 1 -
>> fs/namei.c | 1333 +++++++++------------
>> fs/namespace.c | 96 +-
>> fs/open.c | 4 +-
>> include/linux/namei.h | 4 +-
>> 7 files changed, 642 insertions(+), 809 deletions(-)
>>
>> but it would have been nice to see in your explanation too.
>>
>> Anyway, from a quick read-through, I don't see anything that raises my
>> hackles - you've fixed the goto label naming, and I didn't notice
>> anything else odd.
>>
>> Maybe that was because I wasn't careful enough. But the final line
>> count certainly speaks for the series..
>
> Heh... Part of my metrics is actually "how large a sheet of paper does
> one need to fit the call graph on" ;-)
>
> I hope it gets serious beating, though - it touches pretty much every
> codepath in pathname resolution. Is there any way to sic the bots on
> a branch, short of "push it into -next and wait for screams"?

Last I looked pushing a branch to kernel.org was enough for the
kbuild bots. Sending patches to LKML is also enough for those bots.

I don't know if that kind of bot is what you need testing your code.

Eric