[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] IMA: making i_readcount a first class inode citizen
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Mimi Zohar <> 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?


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-29 00:57    [W:0.051 / U:0.596 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site