| 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: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 00:22:55 +0300 From: Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com> To: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: [RFD] Incremental fsck Andi Kleen wrote: > Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu> writes: > > Now, there are good reasons for doing periodic checks every N mounts > > and after M months. And it has to do with PC class hardware. (Ted's > > aphorism: "PC class hardware is cr*p"). > > If these reasons are good ones (some skepticism here) then the correct > way to really handle this would be to do regular background scrubbing > during runtime; ideally with metadata checksums so that you can actually > detect all corruption. > > But since fsck is so slow and disks are so big this whole thing > is a ticking time bomb now. e.g. it is not uncommon to require tens > of minutes or even hours of fsck time and some server that reboots > only every few months will eat that when it happens to reboot. > This means you get a quite long downtime. Has there been some thought about an incremental fsck? You know, somehow fencing a sub-dir to do an online fsck? Thanks for some thoughts! -- Al -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists