| 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: <20130403145055.GD14667@quack.suse.cz> Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 16:50:55 +0200 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> Subject: Re: per inode fsync optimization question On Wed 03-04-13 18:21:46, Dmitry Monakhov wrote: > inode store i_sync_tid and i_datasync_tid in order to optimize journal > flushes and wait for commits only when necessary, but > fields are declared as tid_t(not atomic_t as it done in ext3) so we > have not synchronization between readers and writers, so gcc and cpu > is allowed to perform prefetch, cache and other stuff. > Looks like a bug, right? Reads and writes to atomic_t aren't guaranteed to be any kind of a barrier (if fact they are compiled as simple stores and loads on x86). Only arithmetic operations on atomic types are special. So using tid_t is just fine. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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