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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:48:23 -0500 From: Phillip Susi <psusi@...ntu.com> To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> CC: Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: mkfs.ext4 vs. e2fsck discard oddities On 3/1/2012 9:54 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote: > Well, it is not default right ? So the user should better know what is > he doing. Moreover it is not like it is end of the world when we do not > provide that option, since SSD's will handle over provisioning to some > extent even without slowdown, and as for thin-provisioned devices you > should know why you're overriding defaults and what it means for you. > > Anyway, if people really want this another option to discard all the > block groups including those UNINIT ones, I guess I can not resist that > :). '-E discard_all' maybe ? I think the option is a little more generic than discard. The uninit groups are not discarded because they are not checked in the first place. A bad group descriptor checksum will force the group to be checked, and thus discarded as well. I think what is needed is an option to trigger the same thing: force all groups to be checked, even if they are uninit and have good descriptor checksums. Maybe -E thorough? -- 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