linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK

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: <16735.1304537498@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 04 May 2011 15:31:38 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA flags

On Wed, 04 May 2011 13:58:39 EDT, Josef Bacik said:

> +#define SEEK_HOLE	3	/* seek to the closest hole */
> +#define SEEK_DATA	4	/* seek to the closest data */

Comments here need nearest/next fixing as well - otherwise the ext[34] crew may
actually implement the commented semantics. ;)

Other than that, patch 1/2 looks OK to me (not that there's much code to
review), and 2/2 *seems* sane and implement the "next" semantics, though I only
examined the while/if structure and am assuming the btrfs innards are done
correctly.  In particular, that 'while (1)' looks like it can be painful for a
sufficiently large and fragmented file (think a gigabyte file in 4K chunks,
producing a million extents), but I'll let a btrfs expert analyse that
performance issue ;)

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped