linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Properly initialize the buffer

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: <20090510235741.GA3980@mit.edu>
Date:	Sun, 10 May 2009 19:57:41 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	cmm@...ibm.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Properly initialize the buffer_head state

On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 10:20:26AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > These buffer_heads are allocated on stack and are
> > used only to make get_blocks calls. So we can set the
> > b_state to 0
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> I'd noticed this too, thanks for fixing up.

Is this just a clean-up, or does this fix a bug?  It wasn't obvious
the patch description.  (I'm not a big fan of Ingo's 'Impact: '
header, but it is good to make sure the patch description explains the
impact of a patch.)

In the long run, we should really look at cleaning up the get_blocks*
interfaces so they don't use buffer_head when all they're really doing
is passing back a block number.  All aside from the confusion it
causes, it also bloats our stack usage.

						- 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