linux-kernel - Re: dm stripe: Fix bounds

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]

Message-ID: <20061012183529.GF17654@agk.surrey.redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:35:29 +0100
From:	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
To:	Phillip Susi <psusi@....rr.com>
Cc:	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Heinz Mauelshagen <mauelshagen@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: dm stripe: Fix bounds

On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 02:14:05PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
> So you are saying that dmraid should build 3 tables: 1 for the bulk of 
> the array, 1 for only the last stripe, and 1 linear to connect them?
 
No.  1 table.  2 consecutive targets with different stripe sizes, if that's
how the data is actually laid out.

> the only problem comes from the last 
> stripe.  How else could you map the last stripe other than laying down x 
> sectors onto y drives as x / y sectors on each drive in sequence?
 
Depends whether or not you give precedence to the stripe size.
The underlying device might be much larger - dm doesn't know or care - and
the intention of userspace might have been to truncate a larger striped
device part-way through one of the stripes - an equally reasonable thing to
do.

Alasdair
-- 
agk@...hat.com
-
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/