linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix IO error reporting on fsync()

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:56:38 +0200
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix IO error reporting on fsync()

> On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:40:41 +0200
> Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> 
> > > What about putting an address_space* into the buffer_head?  Transfer the
> > > EIO state into the address_space within, say, __remove_assoc_queue()?
> >   Yes, that's of course possible. But it enlarges each buffer head by 4
> > bytes (or 8 on 64-bit arch).
> 
> I suspect we could get that back by removing buffer_head.b_bdev.  That's
> not a trivial thing to do, but should be feasible.
> 
> We can't just do bh->b_page->mapping->host->i_sb->s_bdev because of races
> with trunate, plus the general horror of it all.  But I expect that all
> callers of submit_bh() have the blockdev* easily available by other means,
> so adding a `struct block_device*' argument to submit_bh() would get us
> there.
  OK. For now I've written and tested the patch with the pointer in
buffer head. Later we can have a look at shrinking buffer_head again...

									Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SuSE CR Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/