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, 19 Jun 2008 11:56:45 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <>
To:	Holger Kiehl <>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <>,
	Jan Kara <>,,
	Nick Dokos <>,,
	linux-kernel <>
Subject: Re: Performance of ext4

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:42:36AM +0000, Holger Kiehl wrote:
> Note how the size of file changes from
> 9230 before the test to 8208 bytes after the test. Also note the
> date both have the same timestamp "2008-06-17 04:35". I have made a
> copy of before the test and compared it
> with that after the test. The file is just truncated by 1022 bytes
> and there is no garbage.

So the corruption is always a truncation, correct?

Did you notice the problem with ext4 w/o the patch queue?  I have a
suspicion that the problem may have been introduced by the delayed
allocation code, but I don't have hard evidence.  When you rerun your
benchmark (which seems to be the closest thing we have to a
reproduction case), it would be interesting to know if the problem
goes away with -o nodelalloc (again, it would localize where we need
to look).

Thanks, regards,

						- Ted
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists