linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 01/28] libext2fs: support modifying arbitrary extended attributes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 4 Dec 2013 14:55:31 -0800
From:	"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/28] libext2fs: support modifying arbitrary extended
 attributes

On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 05:43:14PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 12:30:28PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > It doesn't include all of them.  At the moment there are 83 of them(!) which I
> > haven't figured out how to release in a reviewable manner.  Roughly speaking,
> > the patches can be grouped:
> > 
> >  1. The unapplied patches from the October submission (fuse2fs, 64bit
> >     conversion, xattr editing part 1, metadata checksumming tests)
> >  2. The xattr-editing patches
> >  3. Fixes for uninit extent handling
> >  4. Patches to test and turn on block_validity
> >  5. A bunch of coverity fixes
> >  6. Fixes for bugs I found by running xfstests atop fuse2fs
> >  7. Fixes for that thing about block_uninit groups that Akira Fujita and I were
> >     discussing
> >  8. Fixes for 1k block filesystems with meta_bg
> >  9. Patches to prevent too-high lblk mapping
> > 
> > I could collapse all the post-October fuse2fs and xattr-editing patches into
> > the original submissions, but that seems like it would be harder for people to
> > review the new changes.
> 
> Can you send at least some of the fixes independent of patches that
> have API/ABI or functionality impacts, or are dependent on patches
> that will require more careful review?
> 
> In particular, if there are any fixes that might lead to data loss or
> be significant in some way (potential security issues, etc.) sending
> them independently, preferably against the maint branch, would be a
> good idea, so we can get that into a 1.42.x maintenance release.

Shouldn't be too hard, all I have to do is shove the fuse2fs/xattr/64bit-conv
patches towards the end. :)

--D
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 					- Ted
--
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