linux-kernel - Re: hfsplus mount regression in 2.6.38

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: <20110630113520.GA6744@infradead.org>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jun 2011 07:35:20 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Anton Salikhmetov <alexo@...era.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: hfsplus mount regression in 2.6.38

On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 04:58:21PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> I took a crack at converting the users of direct bio to use
> bdev_logical_block_size instead of HFSPLUS_SECTOR_SIZE. sb->s_blocksize
> doesn't turn out to work because it may change after reading the
> volume header. The patch is below; feedback is appreciated.
> 
> So far I've only done light testing, and no testing with large-sector
> devices since I don't have any to test with. I'm still concerned about
> duplicating data also in the page cache with this approach. Any thoughts
> on whether or not this is something to be worried about?

Did you manage to test it on a large sector device?

I'm be rather surprised if we actually need the read modify write
cycles.  I've not seen any filesystem that doesn't align it's metadata
to the sector size yet.

--
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/