linux-ext4 - Re: Proposed design for big allocation blocks for ext4

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: <20110226000304.GC28214@noexit>
Date:	Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:03:04 -0800
From:	Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>
To:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Proposed design for big allocation blocks for ext4

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 06:40:02PM -0500, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 01:59:25PM -0800, Joel Becker wrote:
> > 
> > 	Why not call it a 'cluster' like the rest of us do?  The term
> > 'blocksize' is overloaded enough already.
> 
> Yes, good point.  Allocation cluster makes a lot more sense as a name.

	Thank you ;-)

> We're going to keep track of what blocks are uninitialized or not on a
> 4k basis.  So that part of the ext4 code doesn't change.

	Ok, good.  We don't have that info, so we enjoy a lot of fun
with the various pagesize/blocksize/clustersize combinations.

> We could add complexity to do suballocations for directories, but KISS
> seems to be a much better idea for now.

	Oh dear God no.

Joel

-- 

"Nobody loves me,
 Nobody seems to care.
 Troubles and worries, people,
 You know I've had my share."

			http://www.jlbec.org/
			jlbec@...lplan.org
--
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