linux-ext4 - Re: Buffer state bits

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, 26 Aug 2009 22:27:00 +0100
From:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Buffer state bits

Jan Kara wrote:
> BH_Dirty
> - Ideally, this bit should mean "buffer has data that have to be
>   written". But it is not quite true. The problem happens when
>   someone calls set_page_dirty() on the page to which buffers are
>   attached or similarly when buffers are attached to a dirty
>   page. Then all buffers attached to the page are marked dirty -
>   even those that are beyond end of file which obviously should not
>   be written.
> 
>   When buffer is dirty, the page has to be dirty as well (mark
>   buffer dirty takes care of that). It is not necessarily the other
>   way around and buffer dirty bit is what ultimately decides whether
>   the buffer goes to disk or not.

That last sentence implies page can be dirty while a buffer in the
page is not dirty.

In that case, do buffers beyond the end of file need to be set dirty
by set_page_dirty()?  If yes, perhaps the text could explain why.

-- Jamie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html