linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v5] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has I_DIRTY

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 linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-Id: <166446350051.149484.15018548252092429742.b4-ty@mit.edu>
Date:   Thu, 29 Sep 2022 10:58:26 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, lczerner@...hat.com
Cc:     "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, jlayton@...nel.org,
        ebiggers@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz, david@...morbit.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has I_DIRTY_INODE

On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 12:06:57 +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.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] fs: record I_DIRTY_TIME even if inode already has I_DIRTY_INODE
      commit: 625e1e67b66245b93ccae868cd4a950d257de003

Best regards,
-- 
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>