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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <E1KTiuD-0000ej-JZ@closure.thunk.org> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:54:45 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH, RFC] ext4-use-generic-discard-reservations-call Does this patch make sense? I noticed that in the extents version of the truncate, we call the mballoc-specific version of ext4_discard_reservation(), instead of ext4_discard_reservation() directly. As a result, if the filesystem is mounted -o nomballoc, we won't throw away the reservation window when truncating or unlinking an extents-based file. We are using ext4_discard_reservation() in non-extent truncate code, which is what made me notice this. - Ted ext4: Use ext4_discard_reservations instead of mballoc-specific call In ext4_ext_truncate(), we should use the more generic ext4_discard_reservations() call so we do the right thing when the filesystem is mounted with the nomballoc option. Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> diff --git a/fs/ext4/extents.c b/fs/ext4/extents.c index 3c82ab1..30a59b8 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/extents.c +++ b/fs/ext4/extents.c @@ -2963,7 +2963,7 @@ void ext4_ext_truncate(struct inode *inode) down_write(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_data_sem); ext4_ext_invalidate_cache(inode); - ext4_mb_discard_inode_preallocations(inode); + ext4_discard_reservation(inode); /* * TODO: optimization is possible here. -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists