From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, meetmehiro@gmail.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug 50981] generic_file_aio_read ?: No locking means DATA CORRUPTION read and write on same 4096 page range
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:49:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121126214937.GA21590@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121126201308.GA21050@infradead.org>
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 03:13:08PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:05:57PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > Gosh, that's a very sudden new consensus. The consensus over the past
> > ten or twenty years has been that the Linux kernel enforce locking for
> > consistent atomic writes, but skip that overhead on reads - hasn't it?
>
> I'm not sure there was much of a consensus ever. We XFS people always
> ttried to push everyone down the strict rule, but there was enough
> pushback that it didn't actually happen.
Christoph, can you give some kind of estimate for the overhead that
adding this locking in XFS actually costs in practice? And does XFS
provide any kind of consistency guarantees if the reads/write overlap
spans multiple pages? I assume the answer to that is no, correct?
Thanks,
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-26 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-50981-5823@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/>
[not found] ` <20121126163328.ACEB011FE9C@bugzilla.kernel.org>
2012-11-26 16:45 ` [Bug 50981] generic_file_aio_read ?: No locking means DATA CORRUPTION read and write on same 4096 page range Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-26 18:59 ` Hiro Lalwani
2012-11-26 20:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-11-26 20:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-26 21:28 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-26 21:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-26 21:49 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2012-11-26 22:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-11-27 1:32 ` Theodore Ts'o
2012-11-27 4:27 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-26 22:17 ` Dave Chinner
2012-11-26 20:15 ` Zach Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121126214937.GA21590@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=meetmehiro@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).