linux-kernel - Re: ext2 + -osync: not as easy as it seems

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:	Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:07:07 +0100
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, jack@...e.cz
Subject: Re: ext2 + -osync: not as easy as it seems

On Tue, Jan 13 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
> Adding a barrier shouldn't be that hard; just a matter adding a call
> to blkdev_issue_flush() to ext2_sync_file() before it returns.
> 
> BTW, I think there's a stale documentation bug in in
> block/blk-barrier.c, around line 305:
> 
>   * Description:
>   *    Issue a flush for the block device in question. Caller can supply
>   *    room for storing the error offset in case of a flush error, if they
> - *    wish to.  Caller must run wait_for_completion() on its own.
> + *    wish to.
>   */
>  int blkdev_issue_flush(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t *error_sector)
>  {
> 
> Jens, is that right?

Yep, that is indeed stale!

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/