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: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 11:37:07 +0900 From: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@...sung.com> To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>, Daejun Park <daejun7.park@...sung.com>, harshad shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@...il.com> CC: "tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>, "linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Remove expensive flush on fast commit > > In the fast commit, it adds REQ_FUA and REQ_PREFLUSH on each fast commit > > block when barrier is enabled. However, in recovery phase, ext4 compares > > CRC value in the tail. So it is sufficient adds REQ_FUA and REQ_PREFLUSH > > on the block that has tail. > > Does the tail block *always* contain a CRC, or is that dependent on > EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_METADATA_CSUM, JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_CSUM_V2, > or JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_CSUM_V3 being enabled? In the fast commit, the tail block always contain a CRC. > If one of those features is *required* before the FAST_COMMIT feature > can be used, then this patch looks OK. Otherwise, the CSUM feature > should be checked before the FUA is skipped for non-tail blocks. So, I think it is OK without checking other CSUM feature. Thanks, Daejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists