linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches

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: <20160217230231.GC6479@mtj.duckdns.org>
Date:	Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:02:31 -0500
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@...gle.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Nauman Rafique <nauman@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned
 during cgroup writeback association switches

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 02:41:25PM -0800, Tahsin Erdogan wrote:
> With this patch, I am starting to have issues running fsck immediately
> after umount.
> 
> *** fsck.ext4 output ***
> fsck from util-linux-ng 2.17.2
> e2fsck 1.42.12-gg3 (9-Sep-2014)
> Warning!  /dev/sdb3 is in use.
> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
> Deleted inode 62346243 has zero dtime.  Fix? no

Yeah, that'd be one of the side effects.  Will think more about it.
Jan, do you know why we have both s_active and the rwsem at this
point?  I can't tell why both are needed.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun