linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] ovl: add infrastructure for intercepting file ops

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 Nov 2016 13:03:40 +0100
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        "linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] ovl: add infrastructure for intercepting file ops

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com> wrote:

>> +               /*
>> +                * These should be intercepted, but they are very unlikely to be
>> +                * a problem in practice.  Leave them alone for now.
>
> It could also be handled in vfs helpers.
> Since these ops all start with establishing that src and dest are on
> the same sb,
> then the cost of copy up of src is the cost of clone_file_range from
> lower to upper,
> so it is probably worth to copy up src and leave those fops alone.
>
>> +                */
>> +               ofop->fops.copy_file_range = orig->copy_file_range;
>> +               ofop->fops.clone_file_range = orig->clone_file_range;
>> +               ofop->fops.dedupe_file_range = orig->dedupe_file_range;

Not sure I understand.  Why should we copy up src?  Copy up is the
problem not the solution.

Thanks,
Miklos