linux-kernel - Re: [WTF] ... is going on with current->fs->{root,mnt} accesses in pohmelfs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:02:48 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [WTF] ... is going on with current->fs->{root,mnt} accesses in
 pohmelfs

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 04:30:07PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > > > Why not use the dentries you've been given by VFS?
> > > 
> > > At writeback we do not have parents, so must find a path somehow.
> > 
> > Most of the places do have those just fine and unlike the writeback,
> > rename et.al. really care which pathname is being dealt with...
> 
> POHMELFS uses writeback cache also for metadata, so effectively most of
> such operations are also postponed. Later I turned that off though.
> 
> > BTW, what prevents writeback vs. rename races?
> 
> There are proper locks for such operations.

Which would be... ?  E.g. between writepages() and rename().  What serializes
your write_inode_create() wrt renames?  IOW, how can the server decide that
data from writepages() should go to the same object regardless of the
rename?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/