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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20160524085343.GC8121@infradead.org> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 01:53:43 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org> Cc: Viacheslav Dubeyko <slava@...eyko.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, Vyacheslav.Dubeyko@...t.com, Cyril.Guyot@...t.com, Adam.Manzanares@...t.com, Damien.LeMoal@...t.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: introduce on-disk layout version checking functionality On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 02:13:57PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > As Christoph mentioned, how about checking the feature only like this? > > 1. if the feature is ON, > - go 64 bits , when compiled w/ F2FS_MIN_16TB_VOLUME_SUPPORT > - fail to mount, when compiled w/o F2FS_MIN_16TB_VOLUME_SUPPORT > > 2. if the feature is OFF, > - fail to mount, when compiled w/ F2FS_MIN_16TB_VOLUME_SUPPORT > - go 32 bits , when compiled w/o F2FS_MIN_16TB_VOLUME_SUPPORT > > Thoughts? That goes on to the next question: why do we even need a config option for 16TB+ volume support?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists