linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: introduce per-inode DAX flag

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: <20170825075415.GA748@infradead.org>
Date:   Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:54:15 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: introduce per-inode DAX flag

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 02:20:57PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> The counter-argument is that system administrators do need to have a
> way to signal that they would like the file system to "do something
> different" on a per-file basis, and no one else has come up with
> another way of doing things.  Furthermore, it would be highly
> desirable if the system adminisator can provide this per-file system
> hint with requiring changes to the application.  (For example, by
> adding madvise/fadvise hints.)

We can always add some sort of inode or subtree advice.  It's just
the binary flag that encodes a specific implementation that is
very bad in the long run.

> Is that a fair summary of the argument?

Otherwise yet.

> I have two additional questions I'd like to ask at this point.
> 
> 1)  Has there been any other difficulty that XFS has had due to the
> fact that they have this DAX flag added?  e.g., are there any
> operational, or practical code maintainability issues at stake here?
> Or is this mostly an design philosophy debate?

It hasn't yet.  It will create really annoying problems once we
use raw DAX access for metadata, which I had prototype a while ago
and plan to finnally get in in the next months.

> 2) Are there any users using the DAX flag with XFS such that, if XFS
> were to remove the DAX flag support, those users would complain
> bitterly?

I don't know of anyone that actually uses the flag.  If someone did
that would probably run into problems like changing that changing it
on a file that's currently mmaped would crash an burn badly.