linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] fs: i_version mntopt gets visible through /proc/mounts

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 14 Jul 2020 13:26:17 -0700
From:   Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@...il.com>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Masayoshi Mizuma <m.mizuma@...fujitsu.com>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: i_version mntopt gets visible through /proc/mounts



On 7/14/20 1:30 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 04:45:19PM -0700, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> I wandered back into this thread for some reason ... ;)
>>
>> Since iversion/noiversion is /already/ advertised as a vfs-level mount option,
>> wouldn't exposing it in /proc/mounts solve the original problem here?
>>
>> ("i_version" is wrong, because it's ext4-specific, but "iversion" is handled
>> by the vfs, so it's meaningful for any filesystems, and it will also trivially
>> allow mount(2) to preserve it across remounts for all filesystems that set it by
>> default.)
>>
>> Seems like that's the fastest path to fixing the current problems, even if a
>> long-term goal may be to deprecate it altogether.
> 
> But they should not be exposed as a mount option.  E.g. for XFS we
> decide internally if we have a useful i_version or not, totally
> independent of the mount option that leaked into the VFS.  So we'll
> need to fix how the flag is used before doing any new work in this area.
> 

It's been explicitly exposed, documented, fixed, updated etc for about
12 years now.

I was just hoping to make the current situation - even if we regret its
mere existence - less broken, because going down a deprecation path will
take us a while even if we choose it.

In the meantime I'll just make sure xfs isn't broken on remount, but had
hoped for a more general fix.  *shrug*

-Eric