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: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 09:24:43 -0400 From: bfields@...ldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org> Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, tytso@....edu, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, djwong@...nel.org, trondmy@...merspace.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, zohar@...ux.ibm.com, xiubli@...hat.com, chuck.lever@...cle.com, lczerner@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, brauner@...nel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ceph@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] iversion: update comments with info about atime updates On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 07:40:02AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Yes, saying only that it must be different is intentional. What we > really want is for consumers to treat this as an opaque value for the > most part [1]. Therefore an implementation based on hashing would > conform to the spec, I'd think, as long as all of the relevant info is > part of the hash. It'd conform, but it might not be as useful as an increasing value. E.g. a client can use that to work out which of a series of reordered write replies is the most recent, and I seem to recall that can prevent unnecessary invalidations in some cases. --b.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists