linux-ext4 - Re: Missing JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1177010100.6703.8.camel@dyn9047017103.beaverton.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:15:00 -0700
From:	Mingming Cao <cmm@...ibm.com>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Missing JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT in ext4

On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 10:16 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Just a quick note before I forget.  I thought there was a call in ext4
> to set JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT at mount time if the filesystem has
> more than 2^32 blocks?

Question about the online resize case. If the fs is increased to more
than 2^32 blocks, we should set this JBD2_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_64BIT in the
journal. What about existing transactions that still stores 32 bit block
numbers?  I guess the journal need to commit them all so that revoke
will not get confused about the bits for block numbers later.  After
that done then JBD2 can set this feature safely.


> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Principal Software Engineer
> Cluster File Systems, Inc.
> 
> -
> 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

-
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