linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

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]

Date:	Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:16:47 +0300
From:	"Anton Salikhmetov" <salikhmetov@...il.com>
To:	"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, jakob@...hought.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, valdis.kletnieks@...edu,
	riel@...hat.com, ksm@...dk, staubach@...hat.com,
	jesper.juhl@...il.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	protasnb@...il.com, r.e.wolff@...wizard.nl,
	hidave.darkstar@...il.com, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime at syncing

2008/1/17, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>:
> > > 4. Recording the time was the file data changed
> > >
> > > Finally, I noticed yet another issue with the previous version of my patch.
> > > Specifically, the time stamps were set to the current time of the moment
> > > when syncing but not the write reference was being done. This led to the
> > > following adverse effect on my development system:
> > >
> > > 1) a text file A was updated by process B;
> > > 2) process B exits without calling any of the *sync() functions;
> > > 3) vi editor opens the file A;
> > > 4) file data synced, file times updated;
> > > 5) vi is confused by "thinking" that the file was changed after 3).
>
> Updating the time in remove_vma() would fix this, no?

We need to save modification time. Otherwise, updating time stamps
will be confusing the vi editor.

>
> > > All these changes to inode.c are unnecessary, I think.
> >
> > The first part is necessary to account for "remembering" the modification time.
> >
> > The second part is for handling block device files. I cannot see any other
> > sane way to update file times for them.
>
> Use file_update_time(), which will do the right thing.  It will in
> fact do the same thing as write(2) on the device, which is really what
> we want.
>
> Block devices being mapped for write through different device
> nodes..., well, I don't think we really need to handle such weird
> corner cases 100% acurately.

The file_update_time() cannot be used for implementing
the "auto-update" feature, because the sync() system call
doesn't "know" about the file which was memory-mapped.

>
> 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/