linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: improve in-inode xattr checks

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:   Tue, 3 Jul 2018 11:20:48 -0600
From:   Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     c17828 <artem.blagodarenko@...il.com>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexey Lyashkov <alexey.lyashkov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: improve in-inode xattr checks

On Jul 2, 2018, at 3:56 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
> 
> Artem, it looks like you're just blasting changes from the Lustre fork
> of e2fsprogs without doing any sanity checking or clean up.  Maybe
> there is a somewhat lower standard of quality for the Lustre fork of
> e2fsprogs, but I'd really appreciate it if you could add value by
> cleaning up the patches before you submit them for upstream inclusion.
> 
> Sending lower-quality patches degrades both your open source
> reputation as well as the reputation of the Lustre project.

The original versions of these patches were created on much older
versions of e2fsprogs (1.41 or earlier), so it is entirely possible
that some of them are now outdated, which is why I haven't been
sending them upstream myself.  They definitely need to be reviewed
more closely to see if they are still relevant to newer e2fsprogs.

Cheers, Andreas






Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (874 bytes)