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: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 06:43:15 -0400 From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org> To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, djwong@...nel.org, david@...morbit.com, trondmy@...merspace.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, zohar@...ux.ibm.com, xiubli@...hat.com, chuck.lever@...cle.com, lczerner@...hat.com, brauner@...nel.org, fweimer@...hat.com, linux-man@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [man-pages RFC PATCH v4] statx, inode: document the new STATX_INO_VERSION field On Sun, 2022-09-11 at 08:13 +1000, NeilBrown wrote: > On Fri, 09 Sep 2022, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > The machine crashes and comes back up, and we get a query for i_version > > and it comes back as X. Fine, it's an old version. Now there is a write. > > What do we do to ensure that the new value doesn't collide with X+1? > > (I missed this bit in my earlier reply..) > > How is it "Fine" to see an old version? > The file could have changed without the version changing. > And I thought one of the goals of the crash-count was to be able to > provide a monotonic change id. > "Fine" in the sense that we expect that to happen in this situation. It's not fine for the clients obviously, which is why we're discussing mitigation techniques. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists