linux-ext4 - [PATCH 0/2 -v2] resize2fs: fix up minimum size calculations

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1398684396-32689-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu>
Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2014 07:26:34 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2 -v2] resize2fs: fix up minimum size calculations

The second patch fixes up situations where the flex_bg calculations were
being over-optimistic.  We now assume that all of the metadata blocks in
the last flex_bg must be counted as overhead, since they can't be used
while we are shrinking the file system (so we can more easily recover if
resize2fs aborts for some reason).

I did say that fixing this was low priority, but why it was failing was
nagging at me, and I finally figured out what needed to be fixed.  :-)

Theodore Ts'o (2):
  resize2fs: fix overly-pessimistic calculation of minimum size required
  resize2fs: refine minimum required blocks for flex_bg file systems

 resize/resize2fs.c        | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 tests/scripts/resize_test |  22 ++++++----
 2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)

-- 
1.9.0

--
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