lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: Access Control Lists for tmpfs
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 14:52 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 00:14:23 +0200
    > Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de> wrote:
    >
    > > +static void
    > > +shmem_set_acl(struct inode *inode, int type, struct posix_acl *acl)
    > > +{
    > > + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
    > > + switch(type) {
    > > + case ACL_TYPE_ACCESS:
    > > + if (SHMEM_I(inode)->i_acl)
    > > + posix_acl_release(SHMEM_I(inode)->i_acl);
    > > + SHMEM_I(inode)->i_acl = posix_acl_dup(acl);
    > > + break;
    >
    > i_lock is "general-purpose, innermost per-inode lock". Calling kfree()
    > under it makes it no longer "innermost". But kfree() is surely atomic wrt
    > everything which filesystems and the VFS will want to do, so that's OK.

    and lockdep probably will yell loudly if there's a problem.



    --
    VGER BF report: H 0
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-09-02 09:27    [W:0.024 / U:120.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site