linux-ext4 - Re: Design alternatives for fragments/file tail support in ext4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:56:46 +0400
From:	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Alex Tomas <alex@...sterfs.com>
Subject: Re: Design alternatives for fragments/file tail support in ext4

>>>>> Theodore Tso (TT) writes:

 TT> I suggest this be tunable by superblock field, and not by a /proc
 TT> tunable.  This is the sort of thing which might be different
 TT> per-filesystem, and the algorithm will be most effective if the
 TT> filesystem always use the same cluster size from the time when it was
 TT> first created.  I'd be happy to assign a superblock field for this
 TT> purpose, and add the appropriate tune2fs support if we have general
 TT> agreement on this point.

that would be good. there is even a stride option to mke2fs?

thanks, Alex
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html