linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: Swap checksum

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4BFA5A3F.4040005@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 24 May 2010 13:51:43 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
CC:	Cesar Eduardo Barros <cesarb@...arb.net>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm: Swap checksum

On 05/24/2010 10:32 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> I wonder, though. If we no longer trust block devices to give the
> correct data back, should we provide a meta block device to do error
> detection?

Some block devices do provide space for end-to-end checksums.  For the 
ones that don't, I see no efficient way of adding it (either we turn one 
access into two, or we have a non-power-of-two block size).

> No production filesystem on Linux has checksums (well, ext4
> has a few). Of the ones that add checksumming, I'd say most will not do
> data checksumming (and for direct IO it is not done).
>    

I believe btrfs checksums direct IO.  Unfortunately it has some way to 
go before it can be used in production.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

--
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/