linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] work tree for untorn filesystem writes

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: <20241105150812.GA227621@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 10:08:12 -0500
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Carlos Maiolino <cem@...nel.org>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>,
        John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, brauner@...nel.org,
        Catherine Hoang <catherine.hoang@...cle.com>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] work tree for untorn filesystem writes

On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 05:52:05AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
> Why is this so difficult to grasp? It's a pretty common method for
> cross subsystem work - it avoids introducing conflicts when later
> work goes into each subsystem, and freedom of either side to send a
> PR before the other.
> 
> So please don't start committing the patches again, it'll just cause
> duplicate (and empty) commits in Linus's tree.

Jens, what's going on is that in order to test untorn (aka "atomic"
although that's a bit of a misnomer) writes, changes are needed in the
block, vfs, and ext4 or xfs git trees.  So we are aware that you had
taken the block-related patches into the block tree.  What Darrick has
done is to apply the the vfs patches on top of the block commits, and
then applied the ext4 and xfs patches on top of that.

I'm willing to allow the ext4 patches to flow to Linus's tree without
it personally going through the ext4 tree.  If all Maintainers
required that patches which touched their trees had to go through
their respective trees, it would require multiple (strictly ordered)
pull requests during the merge window, or multiple merge windows, to
land these series.  Since you insisted on the block changes had to go
through the block tree, we're trying to accomodate you; and also (a)
we don't want to have duplicate commits in Linus's tree; and at the
same time, (b) but these patches have been waiting to land for almost
two years, and we're also trying to make things land a bit more
expeditiously.

Cheers,

					- Ted