Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:46:04 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/4] IMA: making i_readcount a first class inode citizen |
| |
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Would making i_readcount atomic be enough in ima_rdwr_violation_check(), > or would it still need to take the spin_lock? IMA needs guarantees > that the i_readcount/i_writecount won't be updated in between.
If i_writecount is always updated under the i_lock, then the fix is probably to make that one non-atomic instead. There's no point in having an atomic that is always updated under a spinlock, that just makes everything slower.
Regardless, I don't think i_readcount should be different from i_writecount.
Al? Comments?
Linus
| |