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: <4F8747A1.8060800@fastmail.fm> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:22:41 +0200 From: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm> To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org> CC: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...m.fraunhofer.de>, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...hat.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, yong.fan@...mcloud.com, sandeen@...hat.com, adilger@...mcloud.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5 3/4] nfsd_open(): rename 'int access' to 'int may_flags' in nfsd_open() On 04/12/2012 10:49 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:32:45PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote: >> On 03/13/2012 10:29 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:09:05PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote: >>>> Hmm, there must have gone something wrong on merging, >>> >>> In that case one approach would be to rebase your last-sent patches on >>> to the same base as Ted's versions, confirm that one still works and the >>> other doesn't, and do a diff.... >>> >>>> my own test >>>> also fails >>>> >>>> http://www.pci.uni-heidelberg.de/tc/usr/bernd/downloads/test_seekdir/ >>>> >>>> (Sorry, it does not say 'failure', but one needs to compare the file >>>> names and telldir-offset numbers) >>>> >>>> I think I will continue in the morning as its already 1 a.m. here. >>> >>> OK, thanks for following up! > > Stupid question: is there any fundamental feature of ext4 this depends > on, or would this fix work equally well for fs/ext3? First of all, Bruce and Ted, thanks a lot for your patience with those patches! I have not looked into it in detail yet, but it should be possible to back port it to ext3. I don't think there is anything that would depend on ext4. I also have ext3 on my todo list, but I first wanted to have it in ext4 (in the sense of stability of ext3, if there still should be a bug...) and I think for 3.4 it is too late now anyways. So unless there are objections, lets target the back port to ext3 for 3.5? Cheers, Bernd -- 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