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: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1402261729020.29071@eggly.anvils> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:30:35 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bpm@....com, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, jack@...e.cz, mtk.manpages@...il.com, lczerner@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/10] fs: Introduce new flag(FALLOC_FL_COLLAPSE_RANGE) for fallocate On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 03:08:58PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > Thanks for explaining more, I was just about to acknowledge what a good > > example that is. Indeed, it seems not unreasonable to be editing the > > earlier part of a file while the later part of it is still streaming in. > > > > But damn, it now occurs to me that there's still a problem at the > > streaming end: its file write offset won't be updated to reflect > > the collapse, so there would be a sparse hole at that end. And > > collapse returns -EPERM if IS_APPEND(inode). > > Well, we figure that most applications won't be using append only > inode flags for files that they know they want to edit at random > offsets later on. ;) > > However, I can see how DVR apps would use open(O_APPEND) to obtain > the fd they write to because that sets the write position to the EOF > on every write() call (i.e. in generic_write_checks()). And collapse > range should behave sanely with this sort of usage. > > e.g. XFS calls generic_write_checks() after it has taken the IO lock > to set the current write position to EOF. Hence it will be correctly > serialised against collapse range calls and so O_APPEND writes will > not leave sparse holes if collapse range calls are interleaved with > the write stream.... Right, I was getting confused between O_APPEND and APPEND_Only! Thanks, I'm back to being convinced by your example. Hugh -- 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