linux-kernel - Re: Finding hardlinks

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: <E1H28Oi-0003kw-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:51:24 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	matthew@....cx
CC:	pavel@....cz, bhalevy@...asas.com, arjan@...radead.org,
	mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, jaharkes@...cmu.edu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	nfsv4@...f.org
Subject: Re: Finding hardlinks

> > High probability is all you have.  Cosmic radiation hitting your
> > computer will more likly cause problems, than colliding 64bit inode
> > numbers ;)
> 
> Some of us have machines designed to cope with cosmic rays, and would be
> unimpressed with a decrease in reliability.

With the suggested samefile() interface you'd get a failure with just
about 100% reliability for any application which needs to compare a
more than a few files.  The fact is open files are _very_ expensive,
no wonder they are limited in various ways.

What should 'tar' do when it runs out of open files, while searching
for hardlinks?  Should it just give up?  Then the samefile() interface
would be _less_ reliable than the st_ino one by a significant margin.

Miklos
-
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/