linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.34 echo j > /proc/sysrq-trigger causes inifnite unfreeze/Thaw event

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100608145621.GD2334@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:56:22 -0400
From:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>,
	Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: 2.6.34 echo j > /proc/sysrq-trigger causes inifnite
	unfreeze/Thaw event

On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 10:58:52PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 12:26:52PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 10:07:41PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > Well damnit.  I guess what we need to do is get rid of the freeze_bdev/thaw_bdev
> > > interface altogether, and move the count stuff down to the super.  Anybody who
> > > calls freeze_bdev/thaw_bdev knows the sb anyway, so if we get rid of
> > > bd_fsfreeze_count and move it to sb->s_fsfreeze_count and do the same with
> > > bd_fsfreeze_mutex then we could solve this altogether and simplify the
> > > interface.  It grows the sb struct, but hey it shrinks the bdev struct :).  How
> > > horrible of an idea is that?  Thanks,
> > 
> > Kind of what I was thinking of. I wasn't sure about what btrfs
> > required, but you've cleared that up. I'll put a patch together and
> > see how it looks.
> 
> Not too bad:
> 
>  8 files changed, 137 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
> 
> It really needs to be split up into multiple commits and the test
> case needs to exercise dmsetup suspend/resume as well, but I think
> this works well enough for comments at this point. I've only tested
> it on XFS so far.
> 

I like it.  Everything seems in order, course now I realize that dm trying to
freeze a bdev with btrfs on it will not work, but thats a seperate, horrible
situation that can wait till later :).  Thanks,

Josef
--
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/