linux-ext4 - Re: ext3: bogus i_mode errors with 2.6.18.1

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:	Thu, 26 Oct 2006 18:02:41 +0200
From:	Andre Noll <maan@...temlinux.org>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Eric Sandeen <esandeen@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: ext3: bogus i_mode errors with 2.6.18.1

On 03:36, Andreas Dilger wrote:

> On Oct 25, 2006  11:44 +0200, Andre Noll wrote:
> > Are you saying that ext3_set_bit() should simply be called with
> > "ret_block" as its first argument? If yes, that is what the revised
> > patch below does.
> 
> You might need to call ext3_set_bit_atomic() (as claim_block() does,
> not sure.

I _think_ it doesn't matter much which one is used as on most archs
ext3_set_bit_atomic() is only a wrapper for test_and_set_bit() just like
ext3_set_bit() is. The only exceptions seem to be those archs that use
the generic bitops and m68knommu.

> The other issue is that you need to potentially set "num" bits in the
> bitmap here, if those all overlap metadata.  In fact, it might just
> make more sense at this stage to walk all of the bits in the bitmaps,
> the inode table and the backup superblock and group descriptor to see
> if they need fixing also.

I tried to implement this, but I could not find out how to check at this
point whether a given bit (in the block bitmap, say) needs fixing.

Thanks
Andre
-- 
The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)