On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
quoted text
>
> a) i_writecount is about VM_DENYWRITE, basically.  Reusing it for ima could
> get unpleasant; when it's positive, we are fine, but it can get negative as
> well.  IMA will have interesting time dealing with that.
>
> b) i_count is simply a refcount for struct inode.  Not exactly the number
> of dentries, but that's the main contributor.  Basically, that's "how many
> pointers outside of inode hash chains point that that struct inode at the
> moment".

My question was deeper. More along the lines of "why would IMA care?"

How/why could IMA ever care about the pointless and trivial
differences between its current private open/read/write counts and the
counts that we already maintain?

Yes, yes, I realize that they have technical differences in what they
count. That's not the question. The question is "Why would IMA care?"

                       Linus
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/