linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Flex_BG ialloc awareness V2.

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:	Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:58:57 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To:	"Jose R. Santos" <jrs@...ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Flex_BG ialloc awareness V2.

On Dec 13, 2007  09:51 -0600, Jose R. Santos wrote:
> Now, storing the bits only guaranties that the flexbg size is always a
> power-of-two and does not guarantee that the super block flexbg size
> represents the actual meta-data grouping on disk.  For this we need to
> verify that the bitmap offsets match what the super block reports.  It
> may be an unlikely scenario, but it may be worth it to check this as
> well at mount time.

I'm not sure what you mean...  Isn't the flexbg size just a count of
the number of block groups?  If it is always a power of two, and the
groups per metabg is always a power of two (it is) then they will
always be even multiples.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

-
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