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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:07:24 -0800 From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> Cc: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@...il.com>, "linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, Ian Nartowicz <claws@...towicz.co.uk>, Tao Ma <tm@....ma>, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@...bao.com> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ext4: handle fast symlink properly with inline_data I suspect that the stats for symlinks > 60 but < ~150 chars is only a very small fraction of files. If the code complexity of handling this is very small (i.e. it is just handled as a natural consequence of writing "data" of this size) then I would be OK with it. Otherwise, I expect the code and maintenance overhead of supporting the 0.01% (?) of symlinks that are this size is probably lot worth it. People could check what the actual usage is via the "fsstats" tool at: http://www.pdsi-scidac.org/fsstats/ There is also data there already that reports stats on symlink length, but it is mostly HPC filesystems and it might be better to redo this with a desktop-type workload. Cheers, Andreas >> On Feb 17, 2014, at 17:52, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 03:07:17PM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote: >> >> I am not sure whether or not we need to enable inline_data for a fast >> symlink inode. Obviously, it brings a benefit that after enabling >> inline_data feature for a fast symlink we can get more space to store >> the path. But it seems that the original patch doesn't want to do this >> Another solution for fixing this bug is to disable inline_data for a >> fast symlink. Any comment? > > Well, if we are using inline data, and we have a symlink which is > longer than 60 bytes, but less than extra space available for an > inline data, it seems like a good thing to support. > > The downside is that it is a bit more complication to add the kernel's > code in both the kernel as well as e2fsprogs, but it doesn't seem that > bad. > > So I don't have any objections to adding this functionality. What do > other folks think? > > - 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists