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  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, 12 Aug 2019 14:01:06 -0400
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <>
To:     harshad shirwadkar <>
Cc:     Andreas Dilger <>,
        Ext4 Developers List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] jbd2: fast-commit commit path new APIs

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:41:48AM -0700, harshad shirwadkar wrote:
> I see, so you mean each fsync() call will result in exactly one inode
> to be committed (the inode on which fsync was called), right? I agree
> this doesn't need to go through JBD2 but we need a mechanism to inform
> JBD2 about this fast commit since JBD2 maintains sub-transaction ID.
> JBD2 will in turn need to make sure that a subtid was allocated for
> such a fast commit and it was incremented once the fast commit was
> successful as well.

Why does JBD2 need to maintain the sub-transaction ID?  We can only
have a single fast commit happening at a time, and while a fast commit
is happening we can't allow a full commit from happening (or vice
versa).  So we need a mutex which enforces this, the transaction id
can just be a field in the transaction structure.


					- Ted

Powered by blists - more mailing lists