On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 5:18 PM Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +static inline void makeatomicname(struct filename *name) > > +{ > > + VFS_BUG_ON(IS_ERR_OR_NULL(name)); > > + /* > > + * The name can legitimately already be atomic if it was cached by > > audit. > > + * If switching the refcount to atomic, we need not to know we are the > > + * only non-atomic user. > > + */ > > + VFS_BUG_ON(name->owner != current && !name->is_atomic); > > + /* > > + * Don't bother branching, this is a store to an already dirtied > > cacheline. > > + */ > > + name->is_atomic = true; > > +} > > Should this not depend on audit being enabled? io_uring without audit is > fine. >
I thought about it, but then I got worried about transitions from disabled to enabled -- will they suddenly start looking here? Should this test for audit_enabled, audit_dummy_context() or something else? I did not want to bother analyzing this. I'll note though this would be an optimization on top of the current code, so I don't think it *blocks* the patch. -- Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik gmail.com>
