linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfs: don't let the dirty time inodes get more than a day stale

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]

Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2014 23:45:08 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	xfs@....sgi.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfs: don't let the dirty time inodes get more than a
 day stale

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:53:32PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:59:23PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > Guarantee that the on-disk timestamps will be no more than 24 hours
> > stale.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
> 
> If we put these inodes on the dirty inode list with at writeback
> time of 24 hours, this is completely unnecessary.

What do you mean by "a writeback time of 24 hours"?  Do you mean
creating a new field in the inode which specifies when the writeback
should happen?  I still worry about the dirty inode list getting
somewhat long large in the strictatime && lazytime case, and the inode
bloat nazi's coming after us for adding a new field to struct inode
structure.

Or do you mean trying to abuse the dirtied_when field in some way?

      	       	      	       	   - 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