| 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: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 18:40:18 +0200 From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> To: "Morales, Alejandra" <alejandra.morales@....de> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Doubts on IO requests in USB subsystem On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 08:20 +0000, Morales, Alejandra wrote: > mounted and there is no application using them at the moment, so that > I was expecting that none > of them receive file system requests. Indeed the SATA HD does not > receive any requests unless I > mount or unmount it, but the USB HD receives a large number of file > system requests and it seems > that it never enters into an idle state. Since any application is > using it I think these requests may > come from the USB subsystem. Am I right? If so, how could I determine > whether a request comes > from the USB subsystem or it is a file system request that actually > moves blocks? Your prime suspect is the detection of medium change which was moved into the kernel in 3.2 or so. It can be disabled by sysfs. Generally the notion that a certain task originates a read or write on a block device is iffy. Read-ahead and shared data structures make it impossible to accurately tell. USB storage devices are notorious for setting the removable bit even if they have no removable medium. Regards Oliver -- 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