linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC 0/1] ext4/054: Should we remove auto and quick group?

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:   Wed, 26 Jan 2022 13:06:59 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     fstests <fstests@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        chenlong <chenlongcl.chen@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/1] ext4/054: Should we remove auto and quick group?

On 22/01/25 03:08PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:32:01AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > Hello Zhang/Ted,
> >
> > Looks like the issue fixed by patches at [1], were observed with fault injection
> > testing and with errors=continue mount option. But were not cc'd to stable.
> >
> > Do you think those should be cc'd to stable tree?
>
> I already requested that they be backported, and they are in 5.10.89+
> and 5.15.12+.  Unfortunately the patches don't backport cleanly into
> 5.4, and while I did the manual backport for 5.10, I haven't gotten
> around to backporting them into 5.4 or older kernels.
>

Sure Ted, thanks a lot for the backport and for providing above information.

-ritesh