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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20110630131238.GA9478@infradead.org>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:12:38 -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 30, 2011 at 02:10:12PM +0100, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> I agree. What I was more concerned about was that if you had e.g. a 2 KB
> sector device, metadata could possibly end up in the filesystem cache
> along with some file data in an adjacent block, and that as a result you
> could overwrite that data structure with stale data.

Given that all other metadata in hfsplus is part of an inode with it's
own address space we would have done that already before.
--
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/