linux-kernel - Re: Update of file offset on write() etc. is non-atomic with I/O

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]

Date:	Tue, 4 Mar 2014 13:17:50 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Update of file offset on write() etc. is non-atomic with I/O

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> OK, with the attached set (the first one is essentially unchanged from
> your first one), it seems to work and produce better code on all targets
> I've tried.  Comments?

I'm certainly ok with it. You seem to have left the fput_light()
function around, though, despite removing fget_[raw_]light(). That
seems a bit silly, since there is no valid use any more apart from
net/socket.c that now doesn't balance things properly.

> I've also pushed those (on top of old ocfs2 fix) into vfs.git#for-linus,
> if you prefer to read it that way.  Should propagate in a few...

Should I pull?

I also get the feeling that the first patch should likely be marked
for stable. Hmm?

             Linus
--
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/