linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 04/23] filemap: set the order of the index in page_cache_delete

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:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 20:43:28 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Pankaj Raghav <kernel@...kajraghav.com>
Cc:     linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        p.raghav@...sung.com, david@...morbit.com, da.gomez@...sung.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        djwong@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, chandan.babu@...cle.com,
        mcgrof@...nel.org, gost.dev@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 04/23] filemap: set the order of the index in
 page_cache_delete_batch()

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 08:38:29PM +0200, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
> 
> Similar to page_cache_delete(), call xas_set_order for non-hugetlb pages
> while deleting an entry from the page cache.

Is this necessary?  As I read xas_store(), if you're storing NULL, it
will wipe out all sibling entries.  Was this based on "oops, no, it
doesn't" or "here is a gratuitous difference, change it"?