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  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, 10 Aug 2011 21:13:09 +0200
From:	Bernd Schubert <>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] nfsd: vfs_llseek() with 32 or 64 bit offsets (hashes)

On 08/09/2011 07:33 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 05:38:13PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>> Use 32-bit or 64-bit llseek() hashes for directory offsets depending on
>> the NFS version. NFSv2 gets 32-bit hashes only.
>> NOTE: This patch got rather complex as Christoph asked to set the
>> filp->f_mode flag in the open call or immediatly after dentry_open()
>> in nfsd_open() to avoid races.
>> Personally I still do not see a reason for that and in my opinion
>> FMODE_32BITHASH/FMODE_64BITHASH flags could be set nfsd_readdir(), as it
>> follows directly after nfsd_open() without a chance of races.
> The bulk of the patch seems to be just an access->may_flags rename.
> Could you please split that into a separate patch?

Ok, shall I resend the entire patch series, but already remove the 
32-bit nfsd_readdir() cookie patch? Or only just this patch split into 
to parts?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists