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:   Thu, 5 Oct 2023 22:33:17 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...weicloud.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, yi.zhang@...wei.com,
        chengzhihao1@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/16] ext4: correct the start block of counting
 reserved clusters

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 03:10:31PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 24-08-23 17:26:04, Zhang Yi wrote:
> > From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
> > 
> > When big allocate feature is enabled, we need to count and update
> > reserved clusters before removing a delayed only extent_status entry.
> > {init|count|get}_rsvd() have already done this, but the start block
> > number of this counting isn's correct in the following case.
> > 
> >   lblk            end
> >    |               |
> >    v               v
> >           -------------------------
> >           |                       | orig_es
> >           -------------------------
> >                    ^              ^
> >       len1 is 0    |     len2     |
> > 
> > If the start block of the orig_es entry founded is bigger than lblk, we
> > passed lblk as start block to count_rsvd(), but the length is correct,
> > finally, the range to be counted is offset. This patch fix this by
> > passing the start blocks to 'orig_es->lblk + len1'.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
> 
> Looks good. Feel free to add:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>

Thanks, I've applied the first two patches in this series, since these
are bug fixes.  The rest of the patch series requires more analysis
and review.

						- Ted

Powered by blists - more mailing lists