linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add online file check feature

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: <20151204092035.GA21799@amd>
Date:	Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:20:35 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Gang He <ghe@...e.com>
Cc:	greg@...ah.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, Mark Fasheh <MFasheh@...e.com>,
	rgoldwyn@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Add online file check feature

On Fri 2015-12-04 01:36:21, Gang He wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> 
> >>> 
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 07:05:27PM -0700, Gang He wrote:
> >> Hello Pavel,
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >>> 
> >> > On Wed 2015-10-28 14:25:57, Gang He wrote:
> >> >> When there are errors in the ocfs2 filesystem,
> >> >> they are usually accompanied by the inode number which caused the error.
> >> >> This inode number would be the input to fixing the file.
> >> >> One of these options could be considered:
> >> >> A file in the sys filesytem which would accept inode numbers.
> >> >> This could be used to communication back what has to be fixed or is fixed.
> >> >> You could write:
> >> >> $# echo "CHECK <inode>" > /sys/fs/ocfs2/devname/filecheck
> >> >> or
> >> >> $# echo "FIX <inode>" > /sys/fs/ocfs2/devname/filecheck
> >> >> 
> >> > 
> >> > Are you sure this is reasonable interface? I mean.... sysfs is
> >> > supposed to be one value per file. And I don't think its suitable for
> >> > running commands.
> >> Usually, the corrupted file (inode) should be rarely encountered for OCFS2 
> > file system, then
> >> lots of commands are executed via this interface with high performance is 
> > not expected by us.
> >> Second, after online file check is added, we also plan to add a mount option 
> > "error=fix", that means
> >> the file system can fix these errors automatically without a manual command 
> > triggering.
> > 
> > It's not a "performance" issue, it's a "sysfs files only have one value"
> > type thing.  Have two files, "inode_fix" and "inode_check" and then just
> > write the inode into them, no need to have a "verb <inode>" type parser.
> Current, we have three functional items "check, fix and set", in the future, maybe we can add more item.
> Then, for each functional item, we need to create a sys file and add related code (actual some code is duplicated),
> I prefer to one sys file to handle multiple sub-commands.

And we prefer not to have your code in tree.

Please design some reasonable interface. Abusing sysfs for this is not
right.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/