linux-kernel - Re: remount-ro & umount & quota interaction

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0802071508110.25157@fbirervta.pbzchgretzou.qr>
Date:	Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:10:18 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
cc:	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: remount-ro & umount & quota interaction


On Feb 7 2008 15:04, Jan Kara wrote:
>On Thu 07-02-08 13:49:52, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> Jan Kara wrote:
>> [deadlock after remount-ro followed with umount when
>>  quota is enabled]
>> 
>> Hmm.  While that will prevent the lockup, maybe it's better to
>> perform an equivalent of quotaoff on mount-ro instead? [...]
>
>  We couldn't leave quota on when filesystem is remounted ro because we
>need to modify quotafile when quota is being turned off. We could turn off
>quotas when remounting read-only. As we turn them off during umount, it
>probably makes sence to turn them off on remount-ro as well.

Objection. XFS handles quotas differently that does not involve
modifying a file on the fs, so quotas could stay on (even if it does
not make much sense) while the fs is ro.

(Hm, storing quota as files reminds me of the ugly xattr hack in
reiserfs3.)
--
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/