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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:53:34 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> To: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> CC: david@...g.hm, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, David Rees <drees76@...il.com>, Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29 Theodore Tso wrote: > So having some mode where we can suspend all writes to the disk for up > to a user-defined limit --- and then once the disk wakes up, for > reading or for writing, we flush out all dirty data --- makes a lot of > sense. Laptop mode does most of this already, except that it doesn't > intercept fsync() requests. And as long as the user has given > permission to the operating system to defer fsync() requests by up to > some user-specified time limit, IMHO that's completely fair game. Overall I agree, but I would rewrite that as: it's fair game as long as the OS doesn't undercut the deliberate write ordering performed by the userland application. When the "laptop mode fsync plug" is uncorked, writes should not be merged across an fsync(2) barrier; otherwise it becomes impossible to build transactional databases with any consistency guarantees at all. 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