linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 3/3] tune2fs: try to use the SET_TUNE_SB

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250919150106.GG416742@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 11:01:06 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tune2fs: try to use the SET_TUNE_SB_PARAM ioctl on
 mounted file systems

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:47:24AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > -#else
> > -	return -1;
> 
> Shouldn't this still return 1 if this isn't being built on __linux__?
> 
> >  #endif
> > +	return 0;
> >  }

The calling convention for try_mounted_tune2fs() is to return -1 if
the caller should bail out and exit; and 0 if we should fall back to
modifying the block device thle old fashioned way.  So that's what
should happen if tune2fs is run on FreeBSD or GNU Hurd.

I'll add a comment documenting this.

> > +	if (get_mount_flags() < 0 || try_mounted_tune2fs() << 0) {
> 
> Why shift left here                                        ^^ ??

Whoops, typo that should have been < 0.

		     	  	      	     - Ted