linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: Protect group inode free counting with group lock.

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: <4FB3CC8C.4030502@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 May 2012 10:49:32 -0500
From:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To:	Tao Ma <tm@....ma>
CC:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Protect group inode free counting with group lock.

On 5/16/12 9:55 AM, Tao Ma wrote:
> On 05/16/2012 09:43 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 5/16/12 3:49 AM, Tao Ma wrote:
>>> From: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@...bao.com>
>>>
>>> Now when we set the group inode free count, we don't have a proper
>>> group lock so that multiple threads may decrease the inode free
>>> count at the same time. And e2fsck will complain something like:
>>
>> This is only in the ! EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_GDT_CSUM case I guess?
>> That would be worth mentioning in the summary & changelog.
> sure, I will add it in v2.
>>
>> I guess you were testing without that for some reason?
> See my comments below. I found it when running xfstests 269.

Still not sure how you got a filesystem w/o that feature though, unless
I am forgetting something obvious.  Isn't it on by default?

-Eric

--
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