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
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 28 Jul 2022 21:05:11 -0700
From:   Eric Biggers <>
To:     Lukas Czerner <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 03:39:14PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Currently the I_DIRTY_TIME will never get set if the inode already has
> I_DIRTY_INODE with assumption that it supersedes I_DIRTY_TIME.  That's
> true, however ext4 will only update the on-disk inode in
> ->dirty_inode(), not on actual writeback. As a result if the inode
> already has I_DIRTY_INODE state by the time we get to
> __mark_inode_dirty() only with I_DIRTY_TIME, the time was already filled
> into on-disk inode and will not get updated until the next I_DIRTY_INODE
> update, which might never come if we crash or get a power failure.
> The problem can be reproduced on ext4 by running xfstest generic/622
> with -o iversion mount option. Fix it by setting I_DIRTY_TIME even if
> the inode already has I_DIRTY_INODE.
> Also clear the I_DIRTY_TIME after ->dirty_inode() otherwise it may never
> get cleared.
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <>

If you're going to change the meaning of I_* flags, please update the comment in
include/linux/fs.h that describes what they mean.

- Eric

Powered by blists - more mailing lists