linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: Introducing Lanyard Filesystem

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: <50310512.5010108@gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 19 Aug 2012 17:24:02 +0200
From:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
To:	Dan Luedtke <mail@...rl.de>
CC:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Introducing Lanyard Filesystem

Il 19/08/2012 18:53, Dan Luedtke ha scritto:
> On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 15:27 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>> 	* unlimited recursion
> I am already working on that one, but it's tricky.
>
>> 	* unlink() does *not* truncate the file contents;
> I did not know that.

I add that vmtruncate is deprecated and I see a call to inode_dio_wait 
but no support for direct IO. In addition the lock rules seem strange, I 
would avoid playing with inode->i_lock.

>
>> 	* while we are at it, neither of those should free the on-disk
>> inode; again, that should happen only when the inode is evicted.
> Makes sense now. Thanks!

And I think you'll call d_delete two times.

As general suggestion: to have a general view how things can work you 
can look at other fs. Maybe ramfs or tmpfs are simple enough to 
understand the general concepts.

Marco

--
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/