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:	Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:37:31 -0400
From:	Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	npiggin@...e.de, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	drepper@...hat.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] new stat*fs-like syscall?

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Something like fsid but actually specified to uniquely identify a
>> superblock.  (Currently, fsid seems to be set by the filesystem, and
>> nothing in particular ensures that two different filesystems couldn't
>> have collisions.)  We could guarantee (or have a flag guaranteeing) that
>> (fsid, st_inode) actually uniquely identifies an inode.
>>
>> Similarly, something like fsid that uniquely identifies the vfsmount
>> could be useful, although I don't know how easy that would be to provide
>> for fstat?fs.
>>
>> If we could expose the complete set of filesystem mount options so that
>> mount(1) didn't have to look at /proc/self/mounts or /etc/mtab, then
>> playing with chroots would be that much easier.
>>
>> Should we expose superblock and vfsmount options separately?  We have
>> read-only bind mounts now, but the way they work is rather inscrutable,
>> and if stat?fs could say "superblock is read-write but vfsmount is
>> readonly" then people might be able to make more sense of what's going on.
>
> You'll find all of those things in /proc/self/mountinfo.

Wasn't the point that /proc/self/mounts (and presumably
/proc/self/mountinfo) isn't scalable and we wanted a syscall to query
it efficiently (and racelessly)?

--Andy
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ