linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: split update_time() into update_time() and write

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20141124172216.GC31339@thunk.org>
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2014 12:22:16 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	dsterba@...e.cz, Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	xfs@....sgi.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] fs: split update_time() into update_time() and
 write_time()

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 05:38:30PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> 
> It is necessary and the whole .update_time callback was added
> intentionally, see commits
> 
> c3b2da314834499f34cba94f7053e55f6d6f92d8
> fs: introduce inode operation ->update_time
> 
> e41f941a23115e84a8550b3d901a13a14b2edc2f
> Btrfs: move over to use ->update_time

Being able to signal an error if the time update fails is still
possible even if we drop update_time(), because the new write_time()
function will return an error.

> 2bc5565286121d2a77ccd728eb3484dff2035b58
> Btrfs: don't update atime on RO subvolumes

Yes, but this doesn't answer my question about other places where the
VFS is only checking MS_RDONLY and MNT_READONLY besides just
update_atime().  Maybe we should be exposing an "is_readonly(inode)"
inode operations function to address this?

						- 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