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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:23:27 -0700 From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com> To: Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>, "Patrick J. LoPresti" <lopresti@...il.com> Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] make file's timestamp more accurate On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:42 +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote: > linux has supported nanosecond order file's timestamp since 2.5.48. > However current file timestamp is got by current_fs_time() and > is only updated once a tick. It can't say true nanosecond accuracy. > In addition, gettimeofday() before a file operation updating > {a,c,m}time would outstrip file's timestamp because of the difference > about time source between gettimeofday() and file's timestamp. > A certain kind of application would corrupted by this problem. Applications mixing gettimeofday and filesystem timesamps can currently use clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME_COARSE,...) - which returns tick granular timestamps, the same as the filesystem timestamps - method to avoid this issue. However, Patrick LoPresti (cc'ed) was working on a similar issue here connected to nfs. > I attached a most simple patch fixing this problem here. However > it has several problems and I don't say it can be applied as is. > The most big two problems is the following: > > - It would cause performance regression, especially in > not TSC capable system. > - Is gettimeofday()'s monotonicity reliable on all systems? It *should* be. But hardware issues can cause trouble here. > The relative discussion: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/13/443 > > Does anybody have good idea? Should it be tunable, for example? I think the discussion from earlier suggested that this be configurable from a mount option so the performance/granularity trade-off can be managed there. Potential pot-holes on the road here: Although I guess doing this on a per-mount basis in the future could make it difficult for apps that use CLOCK_REALTIME_COARSE to function if fs granularity is increased. Some sort of CLOCK_REALTIME_FS could be introduced to map to whichever granularity is right, but that can only be done on a global basis. Hrm... thanks -john -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists