linux-ext4 - Re: buggy EOFBLOCKS

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:	Wed, 18 Aug 2010 23:13:00 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: buggy EOFBLOCKS_FL handling

On 2010-08-18, at 21:01, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> It looks like how we handle the EOFBLOCKS_FL flag is buggy.  This means
> that when we fallocate a file to have 128k using the KEEP_SIZE flag, and
> then write exactly 128k, the EOFBLOCKS_FL isn't getting cleared
> correctly.
> 
> This is bad, because e2fsck will then complain about that inode.  If you
> have a large number of inodes that are written with fallocate using
> KEEP_SIZE, and then fill them up to their expected size, e2fsck will
> potentially complain about a _huge_ number of inodes.

Probably e2fsck also shouldn't complain if EOFBLOCKS_FL is set, but the i_size is within the range implied by i_blocks.

Cheers, Andreas





--
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