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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 14:18:53 +0100 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] fs: don't call ->dirty_inode for lazytime timestamp updates On Thu 07-01-21 14:17:53, Jan Kara wrote: > On Mon 04-01-21 16:54:44, Eric Biggers wrote: > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com> > > > > There is no need to call ->dirty_inode for lazytime timestamp updates > > (i.e. for __mark_inode_dirty(I_DIRTY_TIME)), since by the definition of > > lazytime, filesystems must ignore these updates. Filesystems only need > > to care about the updated timestamps when they expire. > > > > Therefore, only call ->dirty_inode when I_DIRTY_INODE is set. > > > > Based on a patch from Christoph Hellwig: > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200325122825.1086872-4-hch@lst.de > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com> > > ... > > > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > index 081e335cdee47..e3347fd6eb13a 100644 > > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c > > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > > @@ -2264,16 +2264,16 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode, int flags) > > * Don't do this for I_DIRTY_PAGES - that doesn't actually > > * dirty the inode itself > > */ > > - if (flags & (I_DIRTY_INODE | I_DIRTY_TIME)) { > > + if (flags & I_DIRTY_INODE) { > > trace_writeback_dirty_inode_start(inode, flags); > > > > if (sb->s_op->dirty_inode) > > sb->s_op->dirty_inode(inode, flags); > > OK, but shouldn't we pass just (flags & I_DIRTY_INODE) to ->dirty_inode(). > Just to make it clear what the filesystem is supposed to consume in > 'flags'... Aha, you just did that in the following patch ;) So taking back my comment. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.com> SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists