[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgF9p9xNzZei_-ejGLy1bJf4VS1C5E9_V0kCTEpCkpCTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:00:25 +1200
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Josh Snyder <joshs@...flix.com>
Cc: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mincore: allow for making sys_mincore() privileged
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:42 PM Josh Snyder <joshs@...flix.com> wrote:
>
> For Netflix, losing accurate information from the mincore syscall would
> lengthen database cluster maintenance operations from days to months. We
> rely on cross-process mincore to migrate the contents of a page cache from
> machine to machine, and across reboots.
Ok, this is the kind of feedback we need, and means I guess we can't
just use the mapping existence for mincore.
The two other ways that we considered were:
(a) owner of the file gets to know cache information for that file.
(b) having the fd opened *writably* gets you cache residency information.
Sadly, taking a look at happycache, you open the file read-only, so
(b) doesn't work.
Judging just from the source code, I can't tell how the user ownership
works. Any input on that?
And if you're not the owner of the file, do you have another
suggestion for that "Yes, I have the right to see what's in-core for
this file". Because the problem is literally that if it's some random
read-only system file, the kernel shouldn't leak access patterns to
it..
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists