linux-ext4 - Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version

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:	Tue, 3 Jul 2007 15:56:43 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...sterfs.com>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc:	cmm@...ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org
Subject: Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version

On Jul 03, 2007  10:24 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> It looks OK to me, but you might want to strip out the now redundant
> i_version updates in add_dirent_to_buf(), ext4_rmdir(), ext4_rename().

Agreed, and I thought we discussed that already on the ext4 list.

> I also have some questions about how this will affect the readdir code:
> unless I missed something, the filp->f_version is still unsigned long,
> so the comparisons and assignments in ext4_readdir()/ext4_dx_readdir()
> no longer make sense.

I don't see them as any worse than existing checks.  For 32-bit systems
we only ever had a 32-bit in-memory version anyway so using only the
low 32 bits of i_version in f_version is no more racy than in the past.
For 64-bit systems using the full on-disk i_version is possible.

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