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: <4D1AF923.1090502@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:02:27 +0100 From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com> To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca> CC: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, tytso@....edu, chris.mason@...cle.com Subject: Re: Bug in ext4/btrfs fallocate? Il 29/12/2010 07:46, Andreas Dilger ha scritto: > On 2010-12-28, at 09:06, Marco Stornelli wrote: >> it seems that ext4/btrfs code for fallocate doesn't check for >> immutable/append inode flag. > > fallocate() probably shouldn't be allowed for immutable files, but it makes a lot of sense to call fallocate() on append-only files to avoid fragmentation, though it should only be called with the KEEP_SIZE flag. > > Cheers, Andreas > It seems that only ocfs2 does that check, however I think not checking for immutable flag is an error, for the append case maybe you're right, doing this operation on append-only files has got sense. Marco -- 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