linux-ext4 - Re: mkfs.ext4 vs. e2fsck discard oddities

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, 08 Mar 2012 11:48:23 -0500
From:	Phillip Susi <psusi@...ntu.com>
To:	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
CC:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: mkfs.ext4 vs. e2fsck discard oddities

On 3/1/2012 9:54 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Well, it is not default right ? So the user should better know what is
> he doing. Moreover it is not like it is end of the world when we do not
> provide that option, since SSD's will handle over provisioning to some
> extent even without slowdown, and as for thin-provisioned devices you
> should know why you're overriding defaults and what it means for you.
>
> Anyway, if people really want this another option to discard all the
> block groups including those UNINIT ones, I guess I can not resist that
> :). '-E discard_all' maybe ?

I think the option is a little more generic than discard.  The uninit 
groups are not discarded because they are not checked in the first 
place.  A bad group descriptor checksum will force the group to be 
checked, and thus discarded as well.  I think what is needed is an 
option to trigger the same thing: force all groups to be checked, even 
if they are uninit and have good descriptor checksums.  Maybe -E thorough?

--
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