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, 12 Aug 2022 11:20:36 -0700 From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, jlayton@...nel.org, tytso@....edu, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has I_DIRTY_INODE On Fri, Aug 05, 2022 at 02:23:06PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote: > > > > Also what is the precise meaning of the flags argument to ->dirty_inode now? > > > > sb->s_op->dirty_inode(inode, > > flags & (I_DIRTY_INODE | I_DIRTY_TIME)); > > > > Note that dirty_inode is documented in Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst. > > Don't know. It alredy don't mention I_DIRTY_SYNC that can be there as > well. Well, it didn't really need to because there were only two possibilities: datasync and not datasync. This patch changes that. > Additionaly it can have I_DIRTY_TIME to inform the fs we have a > dirty timestamp as well (in case of lazytime). This is introduced by this patch. - Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists