| 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: <20090723215614.GF4231@webber.adilger.int> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:56:14 -0600 From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com> To: Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@...gle.com> Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, Curt Wohlgemuth <curtw@...gle.com>, ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Question on fallocate/ftruncate sequence On Jul 23, 2009 11:05 -0700, Frank Mayhar wrote: > On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 12:00 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Sorry I skimmed to fast, skipped over the fsck part. But: > > > > # touch /mnt/test/testfile > > # /root/fallocate -n -l 16m /mnt/test/testfile > > # ls -l /mnt/test/testfile > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Jul 23 12:13 /mnt/test/testfile > > # du -h /mnt/test/testfile > > 16M /mnt/test/testfile > > > > there doesn't seem to be a problem in fsck w/ block past EOF, or am I > > missing something else? > > I was taking Andreas' word for it but now that you mention it, I see the > same thing. Andreas, did you have a specific case in mind? Ted and I had discussed this in the past, maybe he fixed e2fsck to not change the file size when there are blocks allocated beyond EOF. Having a flag wouldn't be a terrible idea, IMHO, so that e2fsck can make a better decision on whether the size or the blocks count are more correct. I'm not dead set on it. 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists