linux-kernel - Re: [patch 01/22] 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1HMff6-0001es-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Thu, 01 Mar 2007 08:25:12 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	staubach@...hat.com
CC:	miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 01/22] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write

> >> What happens if the application overwrites what it had written some
> >> time later?  Nothing.  The page is already read-write, the pte dirty,
> >> so even though the file was clearly modified, there's absolutely no
> >> way in which this can be used to force an update to the timestamp.
> >>     
> >
> > Which, I realize now, actually means, that the patch is wrong.  Msync
> > will have to write protect the page table entries, so that later
> > dirtyings may have an effect on the timestamp.
> 
> I thought that PeterZ's changes were to write-protect the page after
> cleaning it so that future modifications could be detected and tracked
> accordingly?  Does the right thing not happen already?

Yes, but MS_ASYNC does not clean the pages.

In fact a better solution may be to rely on the dirty bit in the page
tables, so that no more page faults are necessary.

Thanks,
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/