linux-ext4 - Re: Use of kmalloc vs vmalloc in ext4?

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, 24 Apr 2009 23:39:55 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>
Cc:	Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@...gle.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Use of kmalloc vs vmalloc in ext4?

P.S.   What sort of flex_bg size are you using?

          EXT4-fs: not enough memory for 8198 flex groups
          EXT4-fs: unable to initialize flex_bg meta info!

Modern e2fsprogs default to using 16 block groups per flex_bg, which
means 8198 flex groups is a little over 16 TB --- which the mainline
e2fsprogs doesn't support yet.  You wouldn't be using a smaller
flex_bg size for some reason, are you?

If so, can you say something about why?  I've been actually thinking
that we might want to bump up the flex_bg size slight more, but it
appears you're using something smaller; was this deliberate.

	       	     	       		    - Ted
--
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