| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:01:12 +0200 From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> Subject: Re: What's in libata-dev.git On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote: > >On Mon, Sep 11 2006, Alan Cox wrote: > >>We could perhaps do it by ATA version - 255 for ATA < 3 256 for ATA 3+, > > > >Might be sane, yep. > > > Since we're doing this just for paranoia, and nobody can actually > produce a problem case, it's safer just to hardcode 255 for all cases, > than try to come up with a hueristic that won't be exercised for another > decade... If it's a real problem, yes I agree. If it's just hand waving, then no. The fact that 2.4 and 2.6 has been using 256 for ages really tells me that no one has been affected by this. The SUSE bugzilla certainly hasn't seen any entries on it either. > Most new disks are lba48 anyway. (should we use 65535 there too???) Heh, good question. Given that the limit is so high, we might as well just use 65535. It's not nearly as sensitive as the lba28 case. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists