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:   Thu, 30 Mar 2017 23:22:17 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Apparent backward time travel in timestamps on file creation

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> The "is it in sync with gettimeofday()" is interesting too, even if
> the answer is that you don't expect it to be _perfectly_ in sync. A
> test that just reports maximum slop might be an interesting test, and
> could show real problems (maybe bad network time synchronization, but
> maybe actual bugs in our internal xtime handling even for local
> filesystems!).

I wonder if multi-cpu systems might show interesting differences between CPUs
too.  I would hope not since xtime is based on a global variable.

> And then if your tool starts reporting times that are off by seconds
> or minutes, people might say "Hey, that's not right.." and find
> something.

More likely never see it as the output is hidden away by xfstests.  Probably
xfstests needs to gain some way of lending prominence to information of this
type.

David

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ