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]
Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:27:14 +0800
From:	Zheng Liu <>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <>
	Yongqiang Yang <>,
	Allison Henderson <>,
	Zheng Liu <>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8 v2] ext4: initialize extent status tree

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:37:40PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:24:26AM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote:
> > > Can you let me know what changes you need to make?  If it is to add
> > > new features or new sanity checks, does it make sense to simply make
> > > it as new commits to existing patch set?  Or are there fundamental
> > > problems with the current set, that would be better to fix in the
> > > current set of commits?  (Or is it just minor stylistic/spelling
> > > fixes?)
> > > 
> > > Thanks!!
> > 
> > In new patch set, there is three changes as beblow:
> > 
> > 1. add a sanity check in ext4_evict_inode()
> > 2. fix a bug in ext4_find_delalloc_range().  This bug is reported by
> > xfstest #230 when we enable bigalloc feature.
> > 3. Add a new rwlock to protect extent status tree.
> > 
> > So I think that we can only add a sanity check and fix the bigalloc bug,
> > and then apply this patch set because the changes are minor.  For adding
> > a new lock to protect extent status tree, we can add this feature in a
> > new patch.  If you think it is OK, I can generate a new patch set, do
> > some tests using xfstest, and submit it as soon as possible.  What's
> > your opinion?
> Do you think you can get me the patches by the end of the week?  If
> so, that should work.

Hi Ted,

Until now, I have fixed the bigalloc bug that is reported by xfstest
#230, and merged Hugh's patch.  But I do really think that this patch
set couldn't be applied at this merge window because the change is not
*minor*, and it still needs to do more tests.  That would be great if
you can keep this patch set in dev branch at this merge window.  Thanks!

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