linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add inode checksum support to ext4

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: <20110801045710.GB5716@noexit.corp.google.com>
Date:	Sun, 31 Jul 2011 21:57:11 -0700
From:	Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>
To:	Coly Li <colyli@...il.com>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <aedilger@...il.com>,
	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add inode checksum support to ext4

On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 07:52:41AM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> On 2011年07月31日 15:08, Joel Becker Wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 03:25:32PM +0800, Coly Li wrote:
> >> And in non-journal mode, there is not copy of any meta data block in jbd2, we need to be
> >> more careful in check summing, e.g. inode/block bitmap blocks...
> > 
> > 	Sure, but you could use a trigger in journaled mode and then do
> > the checksums directly in the __ext4_handle_journal_dirty_*() functions
> > in non-journaled mode.  Sure, it would be a little more CPU time, but
> > the user picked "checksums + no journal" at mkfs time.
> > 
> 
> Yes, my idea was similar to you.
> One thing not clear to me is, in non-journal mode, how to make the page of bitmap block being stable. Because bits
> setting in Ext4 bitmap is non-locking, it might be possible that new bit setting after check sum is calculated.

	Every place that changes the bits will eventually call
ext4_journal_dirty(), which recalculates the checksum.  So there's no
danger of a set-bit-after-last-checksum.  But you will have to lock
around the checksum calculation in non-journaling mode.  JBD2 handles it
for journaling mode.

Joel

-- 

"The whole principle is wrong; it's like demanding that grown men 
 live on skim milk because the baby can't eat steak."
        - author Robert A. Heinlein on censorship

			http://www.jlbec.org/
			jlbec@...lplan.org
--
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/