linux-kernel - Re: [f2fs-dev][PATCH] f2fs: not allowed to set file both cold and hot

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:   Tue, 20 Jun 2023 15:54:54 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
To:     何云蕾(Yunlei he) <heyunlei@...o.com>,
        jaegeuk@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev][PATCH] f2fs: not allowed to set file both cold and hot

On 2023/6/20 10:42, 何云蕾(Yunlei he) wrote:
> 
> On 2023/6/20 8:33, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2023/6/13 16:52, Yunlei He wrote:
>>> File set both cold and hot advise bit is confusion, so
>>> return EINVAL to avoid this case.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yunlei He <heyunlei@...o.com>
>>> ---
>>>   fs/f2fs/xattr.c | 3 +++
>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/xattr.c b/fs/f2fs/xattr.c
>>> index 213805d3592c..917f3ac9f1a1 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/xattr.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/xattr.c
>>> @@ -127,6 +127,9 @@ static int f2fs_xattr_advise_set(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
>>>                  return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>>          new_advise = new_advise & FADVISE_MODIFIABLE_BITS;
>>> +       if ((new_advise & FADVISE_COLD_BIT) && (new_advise & FADVISE_HOT_BIT))
>>> +               return -EINVAL;
>>
>> Yunlei,
>>
>> What about the below case:
>>
>> 1. f2fs_xattr_advise_set(FADVISE_COLD_BIT)
>> 2. f2fs_xattr_advise_set(FADVISE_HOT_BIT)
> 
> Hi,  Chao,
> 
>      I test this case work well with this patch,  case below will return -EINVAL:
> 
>      f2fs_xattr_advise_set(FADVISE_COLD_BIT | FADVISE_HOT_BIT)

Correct, I missed to check below statement.

new_advise |= old_advise & ~FADVISE_MODIFIABLE_BITS;

Anyway, the patch looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>

Thanks,