linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fat: make ctime and mtime identical explicitly

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: <CAHuHWtnL4_HV2yGZJ9qY_cSf9t3ot2bVDPJdkKVGehS9iGMMVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Apr 2022 16:24:10 +0800
From:   Chung-Chiang Cheng <shepjeng@...il.com>
To:     OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Cc:     Chung-Chiang Cheng <cccheng@...ology.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...heng.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] fat: make ctime and mtime identical explicitly

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 9:28 PM OGAWA Hirofumi
<hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp> wrote:
>
> Chung-Chiang Cheng <cccheng@...ology.com> writes:
>
> > -     fat_truncate_time(dir, NULL, S_ATIME|S_MTIME);
> > +     fat_truncate_time(dir, NULL, S_ATIME|S_CTIME|S_MTIME);
>
> fat_truncate_time() updates i_ctime too. So S_CTIME should not be
> necessary here. And I think this is better to use only S_MTIME to tell
> this is the point of mtime update.
>
> (And, in fat_truncate_time(), I think S_CTIME is not required, because
> we ignore ctime change, isn't it?)
>
> >       clear_nlink(inode);
> > -     fat_truncate_time(inode, NULL, S_CTIME);
> > +     fat_truncate_time(inode, NULL, S_CTIME|S_MTIME);
>
> This is the point to update ctime. You want to affect ctime change to
> mtime? As I said in previous post, I think we are better to ignore ctime
> change, because it may become yet another incompatible behavior.
>

Thanks for the feedback. I will change the behavior to ignore ctime
updates in the next version of the patch.