lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  popa3d-users  crypt-dev  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  xvendor  musl  sabotage  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Looking for a web hosting provider? Try DreamHost (enter the promo code WAIVE to waive the $49.95 setup fee)
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:37:04 +0900
From:	Akira Fujita <>
CC:	SandeepKsinha <>,
	Greg Freemyer <>,
	ext4 development <>
Subject: Re: Question about ext4 online defrag test case

Hi Ted,

(2010/01/16 15:29), wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 07:11:28PM +0530, SandeepKsinha wrote:
>>>> I found your comment about ext4 online defrag on Ubuntu BBS by accident.
>>>> I would like to address this problem so I ran e4defrag on the system
>>>> which was under memory pressure. But unfortunately I could not find the bug.
>>>> If you have already known how to reproduce this kind of problem,
>>>> could you teach me how?
> I'm sorry I wasn't clear.  I don't know of any specific problem with
> the code, but I and some other ext4 developers remain a bit conerned
> about the code because of how it is structured, and the fact that
> there is so much code and there hasn't been a lot of people spent a
> lot of time going through it and cleaning it up.  We also don't have
> good regression tests for the kernel defrag support code.
> This is partially my fault; I haven't had enough time to do more
> testing and code clean up on the defrag code.  I need to spend more
> time doing some testing and code cleanup before I'll be comfortable
> telling people that it is as reliable as other parts of ext4 in terms
> of not potentially losing their data.  Maybe it's just my paranoia....

All right.
I have already fixed all reported bugs so far,
but I recognize that e4defrag needs more tests and review,
so I will continue testing.

BTW, I would like to ask you about e4defrag command merge plan.
The following e4defrag patches have been released.
How are you going to do these patches in future?

1: From Kazuya Mio <>
[RFC][PATCH v2 1/4] e4defrag: output size per extent by -c option

2: From Kazuya Mio <>
[RFC][PATCH v2 2/4] e4defrag: fix file blocks calculation

3: From Kazuya Mio <>
[RFC][PATCH v2 3/4] e4defrag: avoid unsuccessful return in non-privileged

4: From Kazuya Mio <>
[RFC][PATCH v2 4/4] e4defrag: update man page about -c option

5: From Eric Sandeen <>
[PATCH] Skip "rootfs" entry when checking for ext4 filesystem.

6: From Akira Fujita <>
[PATCH 2/2]e4defrag: Fix open flag for original file
# I sent this patch to you on December 3th personally,
  it's not in the linux-ext4 so I attach it in below.
.$B!!.(BManish also send same patch.

Akira Fujita

e4defrag: Fix open flag for original file

From: Akira Fujita <>

e4defrag command uses EXT4_IOC_MOVE_EXT to exchange
blocks between original and donor files.
And there is a read/write access check for original file
in kernel-space, so open it with RDWR flag in user-space.

Signed-off-by: Akira Fujita <>
 misc/e4defrag.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/misc/e4defrag.c b/misc/e4defrag.c
index 82e3868..424e0ca 100644
--- a/misc/e4defrag.c
+++ b/misc/e4defrag.c
@@ -1605,7 +1605,7 @@ static int file_defrag(const char *file, const struct stat64 *buf,
         return 0;

-    fd = open64(file, O_RDONLY);
+    fd = open64(file, O_RDWR);
     if (fd < 0) {
         if (mode_flag & DETAIL) {

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ