linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/79] s390: switch to new ctime accessors

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: <a76feaed107e83c2d356438cd04b5c790550c92c.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2023 14:46:54 -0400
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To:     Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/79] s390: switch to new ctime accessors

On Thu, 2023-06-22 at 20:22 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 01:51:33PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Thu, 2023-06-22 at 19:35 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:45:16AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Jeff,
> > > > In later patches, we're going to change how the ctime.tv_nsec field is
> > > > utilized. Switch to using accessor functions instead of raw accesses of
> > > > inode->i_ctime.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c | 4 ++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c b/arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c
> > > > index ee919bfc8186..30fa336ec63e 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/s390/hypfs/inode.c
> > > > @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static void hypfs_update_update(struct super_block *sb)
> > > >  	struct inode *inode = d_inode(sb_info->update_file);
> > > >  
> > > >  	sb_info->last_update = ktime_get_seconds();
> > > > -	inode->i_atime = inode->i_mtime = inode->i_ctime = current_time(inode);
> > > > +	inode->i_atime = inode->i_mtime = inode_ctime_set_current(inode);
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  /* directory tree removal functions */
> > > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static struct inode *hypfs_make_inode(struct super_block *sb, umode_t mode)
> > > >  		ret->i_mode = mode;
> > > >  		ret->i_uid = hypfs_info->uid;
> > > >  		ret->i_gid = hypfs_info->gid;
> > > > -		ret->i_atime = ret->i_mtime = ret->i_ctime = current_time(ret);
> > > > +		ret->i_atime = ret->i_mtime = inode_ctime_set_current(ret);
> > > >  		if (S_ISDIR(mode))
> > > >  			set_nlink(ret, 2);
> > > >  	}
> > > 
> > > I guess, inode_set_ctime() called from inode_ctime_set_current()
> > > updates i_ctime and is part of some other series?
> > > 
> > 
> > No, that gets added in patch #1 of this series.
> > 
> > You should have gotten cc'ed on that one, though the postings to vger
> > mailing lists of patches 1, 2, and 79 bounced because the mail header
> > length on those was >8k.
> 
> I actually received #1, if we're talking about this one:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230621144507.55591-2-jlayton@kernel.org/
> 
> I see inode_set_ctime() gets called, but nowere defined.
> 
> 

That's a bug -- that should be calling inode_ctime_set() instead. It
gets fixed up in a later patch in the series, but that should be fixed.

I'm already respinning this now with an updated coccinelle patch. I'll
make sure that's correct on the next posting.

Thanks,
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>