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: <20161215084553.GA19716@infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:45:53 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Stefan Haberland <sth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        hoeppner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] block: check partition alignment

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:33:47AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> For a regular block device, I agree. But in Stephan case, I think that
> the check really needs to be against the physical block size, with the
> added condition that the bdev is a DASD device (similarly to the zone
> alignment check for zoned block devices).

Then they need to expose a chunk_size.  physical block size is defined
as not having a meaning for the kernel.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ