linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] fs/sysv: stop using write_supers and s

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: <1342238669.3209.4.camel@brekeke>
Date:	Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:04:29 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Linux Kernel Maling List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS Maling List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] fs/sysv: stop using write_supers and s_dirt

On Fri, 2012-07-13 at 14:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> The issue Alan raised around the superblock timestamp is still up in
> the air.  I guess he's a slow typist ;)
> 
> My take is "no, we don't need to do that any more" - surely all Linux
> systems have a functional hardware clock.  But the changelog should be
> updated to describe and justify the decision.
> 
While I do trust such system existed and may be even still exist, I
doubt that Linux sysv FS implementation is of any help for them because
it updates the superblock time-stamp _only_ if there was write activity,
otherwise it does not. So you cannot rely on our time-stamps at all
anyway. My patches just make it update the time-stamp more rarely.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)