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  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:	Sat, 4 Nov 2006 20:18:20 +0100 (CET)
From:	Mikulas Patocka <>
To:	Grzegorz Kulewski <>
Cc:	dean gaudet <>,
	Jörn Engel <>,
Subject: Re: New filesystem for Linux

On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:

> On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>>> >  If it overflows, it increases crash count instead. So really you have > 
>>> 2^47
>>> >  transactions or 65536 crashes and 2^31 transactions between each crash.
>>>  it seems to me that you only need to be able to represent a range of the
>>>  most recent 65536 crashes... and could have an online process which goes
>>>  about "refreshing" old objects to move them forward to the most recent
>>>  crash state.  as long as you know the minimm on-disk crash count you can
>>>  use it as an offset.
>> After 65536 crashes you have to run spadfsck --reset-crash-counts. Maybe I 
>> add that functionality to kernel driver too, so that it will be formally 
>> corect.
> Is there any reason you can not make these fields 64 or even 128 bits in size 
> to increase these "limits" dramatically?


First --- you need a table of 65536 entries. Table of 4G entries would be 
too large.
Second --- it will make structures larger and thus some operations (like 
scanning directory with find) slower.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists