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]
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 03:24:42 -0800 (PST)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:     Chris Mason <clm@...com>
cc:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] tmpfs: Support 64-bit inums per-sb

On Tue, 7 Jan 2020, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 7 Jan 2020, at 16:07, Dave Chinner wrote:
> 
> > IOWs, there are *lots* of 64bit inode numbers out there on XFS
> > filesystems....
> 
> It's less likely in btrfs but +1 to all of Dave's comments.  I'm happy 
> to run a scan on machines in the fleet and see how many have 64 bit 
> inodes (either buttery or x-y), but it's going to be a lot.

Dave, Amir, Chris, many thanks for the info you've filled in -
and absolutely no need to run any scan on your fleet for this,
I think we can be confident that even if fb had some 15-year-old tool
in use on its fleet of 2GB-file filesystems, it would not be the one
to insist on a kernel revert of 64-bit tmpfs inos.

The picture looks clear now: while ChrisD does need to hold on to his
config option and inode32/inode64 mount option patch, it is much better
left out of the kernel until (very unlikely) proved necessary.

Thanks,
Hugh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ