linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm] PM: Do not sync filesystems from within the freezer

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: <200707061719.36054.nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Date:	Fri, 6 Jul 2007 17:19:34 +1000
From:	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	nigel@...pend2.net, rjw@...k.pl, pavel@....cz,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mjg59@...f.ucam.org,
	oliver@...kum.org, paulus@...ba.org, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm] PM: Do not sync filesystems from within the freezer

Hi.

On Friday 06 July 2007 17:13:27 Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > To get more serious and practical though, I think the solution is to
> > fuzz the userspace/kernelspace distinction. What we really want to
> > do is freeze things that submit I/O, then sync, then freeze anything
> > that processes I/O and needs to be frozen. In effect, redefine fuse
> > processes as freezeable kernel threads.
> 
> Another myth, that has been debunked already.  The problem is: how do
> you define fuse processes?  There's no theoretical or even practial
> way to do that.

No theoretical or practical way?! I'll freely admit to being quite ignorant 
about fuse, but surely there's some way by which they can be distinguished.

Regards,

Nigel
-- 
See http://www.tuxonice.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing
lists, wiki and bugzilla info.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped