From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [FYI] tux3: Core changes Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 19:22:39 +0900 Message-ID: <20150526102239.GA466@swordfish> References: <555D0FDF.3070303@phunq.net> <555D500B.4080901@phunq.net> <13c8bcdf-70e8-43d5-a05f-58ad839dbfd0@phunq.net> <5563F5C8.2040806@redhat.com> <67294911-1776-46b8-916d-0e5642a38725@phunq.net> <20150526070910.GA3307@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , David Lang , Rik van Riel , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tux3@tux3.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, OGAWA Hirofumi To: Daniel Phillips Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On (05/26/15 01:08), Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 12:09:10 AM PDT, Jan Kara wrote: > > E.g. video drivers (or infiniband or direct IO for that matter) which > >have buffers in user memory (may be mmapped file), grab references to pages > >and hand out PFNs of those pages to the hardware to store data in them... > >If you fork a page after the driver has handed PFNs to the hardware, you've > >just lost all the writes hardware will do. > > Hi Jan, > > The page forked because somebody wrote to it with write(2) or mmap write at > the same time as a video driver (or infiniband or direct IO) was doing io to > it. Isn't the application trying hard to lose data in that case? It would > not need page fork to lose data that way. > Hello, is it possible to page-fork-bomb the system by some 'malicious' app? -ss