| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <x498wsj302t.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:47:22 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> To: Dmitri Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: truncate blocks outside i_size after generic_file_direct_write error Dmitri Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> writes: > We need to remove block that was allocated in generic_file_direct_write() > if we fail. We have to do it *regardless* to blocksize. At least ext2, > ext3 and reiserfs interpret (i_size < biggest block) condition as error. > Fsck will complain about wrong i_size. Then fsck will fix the error > by changing i_size according to the biggest block. This is bad because > this blocks contain gurbage from previous write attempt. And result in > data corruption. > > In order to call vmtruncate() we have to hold host->i_mutex. This is true > for generic_file_aio_write(). In fact occasionally it is also true for all > generic_file_aio_write_nolock() callers except blockdev. But this situation > may change someday. This patch fix only generic_write_aio_write() case. > BTW: update generic_file_direct_write's comment with currently outdated. Do you have a test case for this, by any chance? Cheers, Jeff -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists