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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120819005727.GA15763@thunk.org> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 20:57:27 -0400 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, hughd@...gle.com, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Add invalidatepage_range address space operation On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:00:59AM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote: > This set of patches are aimed to allow truncate_inode_pages_range() handle > ranges which are not aligned at the end of the page. Currently it will > hit BUG_ON() when the end of the range is not aligned. Punch hole feature > however can benefit from this ability saving file systems some work not > forcing them to implement their own invalidate code to handle unaligned > ranges. > > In order for this to work we need however new address space operation > invalidatepage_range which should be able to handle page invalidation with > offset and length specified. > > patch 01: Implements the new invalidatepage_range address space > operation in the mm layer > patch 02 - 05: Wire the new invalidatepage_range aop to the ext4, xfs and > ocfs2 file system (which are currently the only file > systems supporting punch hole) and implement this > functionality for jbd2 as well. > patch 06: Change truncate_inode_pages_range() to handle unaligned > ranges. > patch 07 - 15: Ext4 specific changes which take benefit from the > previous truncate_inode_pages_range() change. Not all > are realated specifically to this change, but all are > related to the punch hole feature. What's the current status of this patch series? I haven't seen much if any comment from the mm folks and the xfs/ocfs2 folks. I've incorporated the patches into the unstable portion of the ext4 tree so I can do some testing (some minor changes to the ext4 patches were needed to rebase the patch series to the 3.6-rc1-based ext4 dev tree, but nothing major). However, I don't want to include this into the ext4 tree for merging into linux-next unless we get general agreement from the maintainers of the other trees that are affected by this patch series. Thansk, - Ted -- 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