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]
Date:	Mon, 13 Jan 2014 13:41:27 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Add support for new compat feature "one_backup_sb"

On Jan 13, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 09:06:45AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> I'm just not entirely sure it's worth the extra hair, either way.  I'm
>> curious to hear what other people think.
> 
> After the ext4 concall this morning, I've been convinced by Carlos's
> and Andreas' arguments that we should add a superblock at the end of
> the disk.  So I'll rework the patches to do that.

Instead of adding a new location for the backup superblock at the
"end" of the disk (which is subject to change if the filesystem is
resized), what about using the last group that would otherwise have
a backup superblock with the "sparse_super" feature?  That means
resizing the filesystem by some amount won't change the location of
the backup, and avoids the need to change all of the documentation
for how to find superblocks.

Cheers, Andreas






Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ