linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH-v4 2/7] vfs: add support for a lazytime mount option

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: <20141127201954.GF14091@thunk.org>
Date:	Thu, 27 Nov 2014 15:19:54 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	Linux Filesystem Development List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux btrfs Developers List <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	XFS Developers <xfs@....sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v4 2/7] vfs: add support for a lazytime mount option

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:14:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> Looking into the code & your patch I'd prefer to do something like:
> * add support for I_DIRTY_TIME in __mark_inode_dirty() - update_time will
>   call __mark_inode_dirty() with this flag if any of the times was updated.
>   That way we can just remove your ->write_time() callback - filesystems
>   can just handle this in their ->dirty_inode() methods if they wish.
>   __mark_inode_dirty() will take care of moving inode into proper writeback
>   list (i_dirty / i_dirty_time), dirtied_when will be set to current time.

One of the tricky bits about this is that btrfs wants to be able to
return an error from write_time() which gets reflected up through
update_time() to the callers of file_update_time().  Currently
__mark_inode_dirty() and family return a void, and changing this is
going to be a bit of a mess, since doing this correctly would require
auditing all of the callers of mark_inode_dirty(),
mark_inode_dirty_sync(), __mark_inode_dirty(), etc.

Doing this would be a good thing, and eventually I think it would be
nice if we could allow the mark_inode_dirty() functions return an
error instead of void, but I wonder if that's a cleanup that's better
saved for later.  While we were at it, maybe we should rename
mark_inode_dirty() to inode_dirty(), since that way we can be sure
we've looked at all of the call site of mark_inode_dirty() and friends
--- and we have a number of file systems, including btrfs, ext3, and
ext4, where mark_inode_dirty() is doing a lot more than just marking
the inode is dirty, and the only reason why it's named that is mostly
historical.

						- 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