linux-ext4 - Re: resize2fs minimum size wrong

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:	Sat, 23 May 2015 20:27:50 -0400
From:	Phillip Susi <psusi@...ntu.com>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
CC:	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: resize2fs minimum size wrong

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 05/23/2015 07:36 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Figuring out the minimum size in a way where we don't screw up and 
> pick a number too _low_ is tricky, because if resize2fs aborts in
> the middle, we can end up with a corrupted file system.

Why is it hard?  Why isn't it simply the number of used blocks, or the
highest fixed metadata block, whichever is higher?

> I'm going to guess the problem has to do with the reserved space 
> needed so that resize works correctly, and the amount of reserved

Reserved for what?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVYRsGAAoJENRVrw2cjl5R8fsIAKPy2Z0IKOpKUcQR/2dpuBp+
i1Td++sM3jPfXkshJrds8xe/B1dqxcVKTK6KOjk3YIQg7cr1XfRZW4hNZ4dU/vDi
NK5UiwHMa15HkVGTcF3ic3mEXmO2x3iYpgMb/9kkVJ9/k+VAXOuku1C59BQ+TAaM
bJ75j4xGatN58wMs4+RqTqDHBo/SiSCSCRvlpBmytcZIjmGguhvY9VtgbS7Wqf3l
GN1IjryP5CQaxq563avoIIl93u6ej4l3gYv2cIBDeBfBUv5iXkMx5rA56Z1PRs7v
WRvOA75aKS6EBq1/7PvRkyvfPOBBMUgRJOoYWziMJQKD044HKVNdy72BGjn3hbQ=
=ngJP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
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