On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 02:36:57PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > Hm, this didn't end up getting picked up. (This jumped out at me again > because i_mutex just vanished...) > > Al, what's the right way to update the locking in this patch?
->i_mutex is dealt with just by using lock_inode(inode)/unlock_inode(inode); I hadn't looked at the rest of the locking in there.
