Re: [FYI] tux3: Core changes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 05/17/2015 09:26 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 05/14/2015 03:59 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> On 05/14/2015 04:26 AM, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>>> Hi Rik,
> <>
>>
>> The issue is that things like ptrace, AIO, infiniband
>> RDMA, and other direct memory access subsystems can take
>> a reference to page A, which Tux3 clones into a new page B
>> when the process writes it.
>>
>> However, while the process now points at page B, ptrace,
>> AIO, infiniband, etc will still be pointing at page A.
>>
> 
> All these problems can also happen with truncate+new-extending-write
> 
> It is the responsibility of the application to take file/range locks
> to prevent these page-pinned problems.

It is unreasonable to expect a process that is being ptraced
(potentially without its knowledge) to take special measures
to protect the ptraced memory from disappearing.

It is impossible for the debugger to take those special measures
for anonymous memory, or unlinked inodes.

I don't think your requirement is workable or reasonable.

-- 
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux