linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Allow SysRq emergency sync to thaw frozen filesystems

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: <1232124141.15209.8.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:42:21 -0600
From:	Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	t-sato@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow SysRq emergency sync to thaw frozen filesystems

On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 10:21 -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 21:49 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:

> > oh, hrm.  Maybe I didn't think enough about how it's handed off to
> > pdflush; I could rearrange if that makes sense?  Or maybe handing to
> > pdflush is wrong, it was just so convenient....
> 
> I don't understand the reason for handing it to pdflush.  I would expect
> thaw to be very fast.  Do we expect it to block anywhere, and if so, for
> very long?  Not that I see any problem with it.

Eric pointed out on irc that this is in interrupt context, so even
taking a mutex is not allowed.  I now agree that handing it to pdflush
is reasonable.

Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

--
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/