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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 23:52:32 +0000
From:   "Kiselev, Oleg" <>
To:     Jan Kara <>
CC:     "" <>,
        Theodore Ts'o <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ext4: reduce computation of overhead during resize

> On Jul 15, 2022, at 2:27 AM, Jan Kara <> wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
> On Thu 14-07-22 19:53:38, Kiselev, Oleg wrote:
>>>> +       sbi->s_overhead += overhead;
>>>> +       es->s_overhead_clusters = cpu_to_le32((unsigned long) sbi->s_overhead);
>>>                                               ^^^ the typecast looks
>>> bogus here...
>> This cast is the reverse of le32_to_cpu() cast done in fs/ext4/super.c:__ext4_fill_super():
>>        sbi->s_overhead = le32_to_cpu(es->s_overhead_clusters);
>> And follows the logic of casting done in fs/ext4/ioctl.c:set_overhead() and fs/ext4/ioctl.c:ext4_update_overhead().
> I didn't mean the cpu_to_le32() call but rather the (unsigned long) part.
> That is pointless because sbi->s_overhead is already 'unsigned long' and
> even if it was not, I have hard time seeing a reason why would casting to
> unsigned long make any difference here.

Got it.  You are right.  The indent of your comment got mangled by mail, so it looked like it was directed to cpu_to_ie32()!  

>                                                                        Honza
> --
> Jan Kara <>
> SUSE Labs, CR

Powered by blists - more mailing lists