Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763558AbYHFLfI (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:35:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759529AbYHFLa1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:30:27 -0400 Received: from pmx1.sophos.com ([213.31.172.16]:58105 "EHLO pmx1.sophos.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759512AbYHFLa0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:30:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200808062110.58764.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> To: Nick Piggin Cc: Eric Paris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, malware-list@lists.printk.net Subject: Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0.2 September 26, 2006 From: tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 12:29:34 +0100 X-MIMETrack: S/MIME Sign by Notes Client on Tvrtko Ursulin/Dev/UK/Sophos(Release 7.0.2|September 26, 2006) at 06/08/2008 12:30:22, Serialize by Notes Client on Tvrtko Ursulin/Dev/UK/Sophos(Release 7.0.2|September 26, 2006) at 06/08/2008 12:30:22, Serialize complete at 06/08/2008 12:30:22, S/MIME Sign failed at 06/08/2008 12:30:22: The cryptographic key was not found, Serialize by Router on Mercury/Servers/Sophos(Release 7.0.3|September 26, 2007) at 06/08/2008 12:29:36, Serialize complete at 06/08/2008 12:29:36 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-Id: <20080806113028.35CD831682F@pmx1.sophos.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2298 Lines: 57 Nick Piggin wrote on 06/08/2008 12:10:58: > On Wednesday 06 August 2008 19:44, tvrtko.ursulin@sophos.com wrote: > > Nick Piggin wrote on 05/08/2008 19:08:05: > > > On Tuesday 05 August 2008 07:00, Eric Paris wrote: > > > > 5. Define which filesystems are cacheable and which are not > > > > > > This is practically impossible to do completely without rewriting a lot > > > of code (which will never be accepted). I don't see why it is needed > > > > though > > > > > as the filesystem cache is supposed to be kept coherent with disk. > > > > Problem is with network filesystems. So could it be a flag somewhere per > > filesystem which would say something like "this filesystem guarantees > > content of a file cannot change without get_write_access or > > file_update_time being called locally"? That doesn't sound like a lot of > > code so what am I missing? > > Maybe... but that's not the same as what requirement 5 calls for. I see what you mean, it should have been worded better. Nevertheless that is what was intended by it - to enable caching only on filesystems where it is safe to do so. > But depending on exactly what semantics you really call for, it can get > tricky to account for all of pagecache. Writes can happen through page > tables or get_user_pages. True that a process has to at some point have > write permission to the file, but the cache itself could be modified > even after the file is closed and all mmaps disappear. I don't have a very good understanding of the VM subsystem I must admit. So in other words with the current kernel file modification time is not necessarily correct - it represents when the file was last opened for modification, not when it was actually modified? (While those two points in time can be arbitrarily separated) How would I use those methods for file modification? I am curious to make a test case.. Tvrtko Sophos Plc, The Pentagon, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, OX14 3YP, United Kingdom. Company Reg No 2096520. VAT Reg No GB 348 3873 20. -- 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/