Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 14 May 2003 10:25:26 -0500 | From | Dave McCracken <> | Subject | Re: Race between vmtruncate and mapped areas? |
| |
--On Wednesday, May 14, 2003 08:06:53 -0700 William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:
>> Which the application thinks is still part of the file, and will expect >> its changes to be written back. Granted, if the page fault occurred >> just after the truncate it'd get SIGBUS, so it's clearly not a robust >> assumption, but it will result in unexpected behavior. Note that if the >> application later extends the file to include this page it could result >> in a corrupted file, since all the pages around it will be written >> properly. > > Well, for this one I'd say the app loses; it was its own failure to > synchronize truncation vs. access, at least given that the kernel > doesn't oops.
I think allowing a race condition that can randomly leave corrupted files is a really bad idea, even if the app is doing something stupid. We know what the race is. We should be able to prevent it.
Dave
====================================================================== Dave McCracken IBM Linux Base Kernel Team 1-512-838-3059 dmccr@us.ibm.com T/L 678-3059
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |