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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:04:22 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <>
To:	Dave Chinner <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] xfs: honor the O_SYNC flag for aysnchronous direct I/O requests

Jeff Moyer <> writes:

> Jeff Moyer <> writes:
>> Hi, Dave,
>> Thanks for the review!
>>> or better still, factor xfs_file_fsync() so that it calls a helper
>>> that doesn't wait for data IO completion, and call that helper here
>>> too. The semantics of fsync/fdatasync are too complex to have to
>>> implement and maintain in multiple locations....
>> I definitely agree with consolidating things.  However, there are four
>> blocking calls in xfs_file_fsync (filemap_write_and_wait_range,
>> xfs_blkdev_issue_flush, _xfs_log_force_lsn, and another call to
>> xfs_blkdev_issue_flush).  How would you propose to make that
>> non-blocking given that those steps have to happen in sequence?
> OK, so re-reading your mail, I think you meant to just factor out
> everything except the filemap_write_and_wait_range.  Here are a couple
> of patches which do that.  Also, since we're not worried about blocking
> in the endio processing, just making things synchronous makes the code a
> lot simpler.  Let me know what you think of the attached two patches
> (which I've already run through xfstests).

Dave, ping?  Did you have a chance to take a look at these patches?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists