linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] Fix EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_HUGE

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: <AANLkTi=XH3R4Tzq=5zXRUUTxTo533HT5=tpwQ1xMs7uU@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:32:12 -0700
From:	Justin Maggard <jmaggard10@...il.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_HUGE_FILE check

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com> wrote:
> Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
>> This isn't the first time that we've had problems like this, and it
>> won't be the last time unless there is a better API for checking
>> these flags.
>
> *nod*
>

On a related note (to my original problem)... is the bad i_blocks
count fixup code in the check_blocks() function of pass1.c broken for
large files, or am I misunderstanding the code?  pb.num_blocks and
ext2fs_inode_i_blocks() are both >32 bits, but the fixup code appears
to always try to shove pb.num_blocks into the 32-bit inode->i_blocks
and set inode->osd2.linux2.l_i_blocks_hi = 0.

-Justin
--
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