mirror of
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
synced 2024-09-12 13:55:32 +00:00
ceffec5541
Dave Chinner wrote: > Yes, because you have no idea what the calling context is except > for the fact that is from somewhere inside filesystem code and the > filesystem could be holding locks. Therefore, GFP_NOFS is really the > only really safe way to allocate memory here. I see. Thank you. I'm not sure, but can call trace happen where somewhere inside network filesystem or stackable filesystem code with locks held invokes operations that involves GFP_KENREL memory allocation outside that filesystem? ---------- [PATCH] SMACK: Fix incorrect GFP_KERNEL usage. new_inode_smack() which can be called from smack_inode_alloc_security() needs to use GFP_NOFS like SELinux's inode_alloc_security() does, for security_inode_alloc() is called from inode_init_always() and inode_init_always() is called from xfs_inode_alloc() which is using GFP_NOFS. smack_inode_init_security() needs to use GFP_NOFS like selinux_inode_init_security() does, for initxattrs() callback function (e.g. btrfs_initxattrs()) which is called from security_inode_init_security() is using GFP_NOFS. smack_audit_rule_match() needs to use GFP_ATOMIC, for security_audit_rule_match() can be called from audit_filter_user_rules() and audit_filter_user_rules() is called from audit_filter_user() with RCU read lock held. Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler <cschaufler@cschaufler-intel.(none)> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| Kconfig | ||
| Makefile | ||
| smack.h | ||
| smack_access.c | ||
| smack_lsm.c | ||
| smackfs.c | ||