linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write

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: <E1HJwCl-0003V6-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:28:39 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	trond.myklebust@....uio.no
CC:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, staubach@...hat.com, hugh@...itas.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write

> > This flag is checked in msync() and __fput(), and if set, the file
> > times are updated and the flag is cleared
> 
> Why not also check inside vfs_getattr?

This is the minimum, that the standard asks for.

Note, your porposal would touch the times in vfs_getattr(), which
means, that the modification times would depend on the time of the
last stat() call, which is not really right, though it would still be
conforming.

It is much saner, if the modification time is always the time of the
last write() or msync().

Miklos
-
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/