linux-ext4 - Re: 64-bit inode support in e2fsprogs? (was Re: [RFC PATCH 11/17] Fix overflow in calculation of total file system blocks)

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:	Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:32:52 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To:	Valerie Aurora Henson <vaurora@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: 64-bit inode support in e2fsprogs? (was Re: [RFC PATCH 11/17]	Fix
 overflow in calculation of total file system blocks)

On Nov 13, 2008  22:10 -0500, Valerie Aurora Henson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 01:04:02PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > There is a similar fix missing from ext2fs_allocate_inode_bitmap() (even
> > though there isn't any support for 64-bit inode numbers as yet.
> 
> That's a question I have: Should the 64-bit port have partial support
> for 64-bit inodes?  Supporting 64-bit inodes is enough effort and risk
> (especially in terms of glue code to convert back to 32-bit versions)
> that I think it makes sense to wait until we know more about what they
> will look like and have concrete plans to support them.

I agree, in general, but this kind of wordsize overflow bug is easy to
miss, and we may as well only have to figure out the bug once.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, 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