linux-ext4 - [Bug 12829] kernel complains on ENOSPC

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]

Message-Id: <20090306230222.2732110800D@picon.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri,  6 Mar 2009 15:02:21 -0800 (PST)
From:	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
To:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [Bug 12829] kernel complains on ENOSPC

http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12829

------- Comment #1 from tytso@....edu  2009-03-06 15:02 -------
What are the precise reproduction details?   We're supposed to keep track of
how many delayed allocation blocks are outstanding, so that we return ENOSPC
*before* we get to this stage.

I'm not sure we do the right thing if we mmap into an unallocated region of
file; when do we actually track delayed allocation blocks?   The right answer
would be at mmap() time, but OTOH that means if we mmap a 2GB region, do we
immediately take a 2GB charge because the process might write into this region?
 And does free space returned by 'df' immediately drop by 2GB?

Do you know if there was any allocation by mmap going on in your reproduction
case?   That seems the most likely cause to me, if I had to guess....

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
--
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