linux-ext4 - Re: e2scrub finds corruption immediately after mounting

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, 10 Jan 2024 08:44:31 -0500
From: "Brian J. Murrell" <brian@...erlinx.bc.ca>
To: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: e2scrub finds corruption immediately after mounting

On Tue, 2024-01-09 at 21:31 -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> 
> AHA!  This is an ext2 filesystem, since it doesn't have the
> "has_journal" or "extents" features turned on:

This is very odd.  I haven't (intentionally) created a ext2 filesystem
since ext3 became available.  :-)

Moreover /proc/mounts says it's an ext4 filesystem:

/dev/mapper/rootvol_tmp-almalinux8_opt /opt ext4 rw,seclabel,relatime 0 0

Do ext2 filesystems actually mount successfully and quietly when
mounted as ext4?  Surely if one asks to mount an ext2 filesystem as
ext4 mount should fail and complain, yes?

Is https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/UpgradeToExt4 still
considered accurate, in terms of an in-place upgrade of ext2 to ext4
being sub-optimal?

Is metadata locality the only thing you don't get with an in-place
upgrade?  If so, how important is that, really?

> Thanks for the
> metadump, it was very useful for root cause analysis.

NPAA.  Thank-you very much for your time and analysis on this issue.

Cheers,
b.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)