linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs/partition/msdos: Fix unusable extended partition for

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: <87vdd2fqpr.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date:	Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:17:36 +0900
From:	OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To:	"Daniel Taylor" <Daniel.Taylor@....com>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs/partition/msdos: Fix unusable extended partition for > 512B sector

"Daniel Taylor" <Daniel.Taylor@....com> writes:

>> Of course, if we can fix, it's better.
>> 
>> However, probably, users of this patch would be only boot loader,
>> because this is a first sector on extended-partition itself, not
>> logical-partitions in extended-partition.
>
> I have not yet tried booting from one of these disks.
>
> They are in USB-attached enclosures, attached well after boot, so the
> bootloader has never seen them.  They simply refuse to mount to a running
> Linux system because, when the storage for partition size and start was
> expanded to 64-bit, no one bothered to fix the intermediate storage in
> msdos.c, so the kernel cannot locate the start nor figure the size of
> the partitions.
>
> Logically, this patch is not complicated.  The data types in msdos.c
> are flat-out wrong, given that the real stored data is of type sector_t.
> The intermediate variables should not be u32.
>
> For users of small disks, that are not shared with Windows XP, the patch
> is totally innocuous.  It does not diminish any existing working behavior,
> for anyone, nor change any API, so I do not understand the resistance to
> using it.

Those are all about the first (1/2) patch, not this second patch.
Personally, I'm thinking we should apply the first patch as bugfix.

I'm talking about only second (2/2) patch in here.

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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/