From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B51C4321A for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E185C2080A for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="V149dt1z" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726022AbfFKECF (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:02:05 -0400 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:35394 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725710AbfFKECF (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 00:02:05 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5B3xS3t127380; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:01 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=6nlMSeiHXuaAoKt04VW27Qxb3rdRfOkxL7bmQeftPRU=; b=V149dt1zKjTA5ARNFnvnnFWV0docEvxmTSemcrCOFNTBc7a30mdN9ueFKeqUrC1M/bpR fs01vi/l+hr8Am8PGvYC/C9oW1KA3/QUskLjHaqodZ9gVJw7TY0j0oz/TVgZjXO2neIC 8TyBZsoQzeZEQZ8RdrR62+jG2flGbpF07ES67pgYg5kSLy9cBSE24h3xZP0eJgV2Onhx eHOipnR7wZRvvze+b39WADeDfrjEDALm3zOjfPeQSv7OBMbYphu7c4rrH+vULUHcw9y6 vW1T/SkAr/raAloXc48bVr+mxjnTj3wW7Ryq82eyxY8UfJGfUbaEqnevwzqpzUVsoEUD tQ== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2t04etjfgn-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:01 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x5B41F1h078043; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:00 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2t024u63pf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:02:00 +0000 Received: from abhmp0022.oracle.com (abhmp0022.oracle.com [141.146.116.28]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id x5B41xkA029089; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 04:01:59 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 10 Jun 2019 21:01:59 -0700 Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 21:01:57 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: "Theodore Ts'o" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] mm/fs: don't allow writes to immutable files Message-ID: <20190611040157.GC1872258@magnolia> References: <155552786671.20411.6442426840435740050.stgit@magnolia> <155552787330.20411.11893581890744963309.stgit@magnolia> <20190610015145.GB3266@mit.edu> <20190610044144.GA1872750@magnolia> <20190610131417.GD15963@mit.edu> <20190610160934.GH1871505@magnolia> <20190610204154.GA5466@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190610204154.GA5466@mit.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9284 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906110026 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9284 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1906110026 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 04:41:54PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 09:09:34AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > I was planning on only taking 8/8 through the ext4 tree. I also added > > > a patch which filtered writes, truncates, and page_mkwrites (but not > > > mmap) for immutable files at the ext4 level. > > > > *Oh*. I saw your reply attached to the 1/8 patch and thought that was > > the one you were taking. I was sort of surprised, tbh. :) > > Sorry, my bad. I mis-replied to the wrong e-mail message :-) Also ... after flailing around with the v2 series I decided that it would be much less work to refactor all the current implementations to call a common parameter-checking function, which will hopefully make the behavior of SETFLAGS and FSSETXATTR more consistent across filesystems. That makes the immutable series much less code and fewer patches, but also means that the 8/8 patch isn't needed anymore. I'm about to send both out. --D > > > I *could* take this patch through the mm/fs tree, but I wasn't sure > > > what your plans were for the rest of the patch series, and it seemed > > > like it hadn't gotten much review/attention from other fs or mm folks > > > (well, I guess Brian Foster weighed in). > > > > > What do you think? > > > > Not sure. The comments attached to the LWN story were sort of nasty, > > and now that a couple of people said "Oh, well, Debian documented the > > inconsistent behavior so just let it be" I haven't felt like > > resurrecting the series for 5.3. > > Ah, I had missed the LWN article. > > Yeah, it's the same set of issues that we had discussed when this > first came up. We can go round and round on this one; It's true that > root can now cause random programs which have a file mmap'ed for > writing to seg fault, but root has a million ways of killing and > otherwise harming running application programs, and it's unlikely > files get marked for immutable all that often. We just have to pick > one way of doing things, and let it be same across all the file > systems. > > My understanding was that XFS had chosen to make the inode immutable > as soon as the flag is set (as opposed to forbidding new fd's to be > opened which were writeable), and I was OK moving ext4 to that common > interpretation of the immmutable bit, even though it would be a change > to ext4. > > And then when I saw that Amir had included a patch that would cause > test failures unless that patch series was applied, it seemed that we > had all thought that the change was a done deal. Perhaps we should > have had a more explicit discussion when the test was sent for review, > but I had assumed it was exclusively a copy_file_range set of tests, > so I didn't realize it was going to cause ext4 failures. > > - Ted