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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 22:34:14 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, andrei.popa@...eo.ro, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>, Marc Haber <mh+linux-kernel@...schlus.de>, Martin Michlmayr <tbm@...ius.com> Subject: Re: 2.6.19 file content corruption on ext3 On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Nick Piggin wrote: > > We never want to drop dirty data! (ignoring the truncate case, which is > handled privately by truncate anyway) Bzzt. SURE we do. We absolutely do want to drop dirty data in the writeout path. How do you think dirty data ever _becomes_ clean data? In other words, yes, we _do_ want to test-and-clear all the pgtable bits _and_ the PG_dirty bit. We want to do it for: - writeout - truncate - possibly a "drop" event (which could be a case for a journal entry that becomes stale due to being replaced or something - kind of "truncate" on metadata) because both of those events _literally_ turn dirty state into clean state. In no other circumstance do we ever want to clear a dirty bit, as far as I can tell. Linus - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists