linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] fs/9p: Remove unnecessary superblock flags

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: <Y/CbhQVeO8/pxrBE@codewreck.org>
Date:   Sat, 18 Feb 2023 18:33:57 +0900
From:   asmadeus@...ewreck.org
To:     Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...nel.org>
Cc:     v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, rminnich@...il.com,
        lucho@...kov.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux_oss@...debyte.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] fs/9p: Remove unnecessary superblock flags

Eric Van Hensbergen wrote on Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 12:33:16AM +0000:
> These flags just add unnecessary extra operations.
> When 9p is run without cache, it inherently implements
> these options so we don't need them in the superblock
> (which ends up sending extraneous fsyncs, etc.).  User
> can still request these options on mount, but we don't
> need to set them as default.

Hm, I don't see where they'd add any operations -- if you have time
would you mind pointing me at some?

As far as I can see, it's just about 'sync' or 'dirsync' in /proc/mounts
and the ST_SYNCHRONOUS statvfs flag; that looks harmless to me and it
looks more correct to keep to me.

(Sorry, didn't take the time to actually try taking a trace; I've
checked the flag itself and the IS_SYNC/IS_DIRSYNC -> inode_needs_sync
wrappers and that only seems used by specific filesystems who'd care
about users setting the mount options, not the other way aorund.)

-- 
Dominique