linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/14] ntfs: update in-memory, on-disk structures and headers

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: <CAKYAXd_Kio7Xeh1SnbZtxrh8nvenQ8RZ59p9RyhE2MSSUbjnMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 13:27:55 +0900
From: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, tytso@....edu, 
	willy@...radead.org, jack@...e.cz, djwong@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com, 
	sandeen@...deen.net, rgoldwyn@...e.com, xiang@...nel.org, dsterba@...e.com, 
	pali@...nel.org, ebiggers@...nel.org, neil@...wn.name, amir73il@...il.com, 
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, cheol.lee@....com, jay.sim@....com, gunho.lee@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/14] ntfs: update in-memory, on-disk structures and headers

On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 4:05 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 01:54:06PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote:
> > > It seem like big_ntfs_inode is literally only used in the conversion
> > > helpers below.  Are there are a lot of these "extent inode" so that
> > > not having the vfs inode for them is an actual saving?
> > Right, In NTFS, a base MFT record (represented by the base ntfs_inode)
> > requires a struct inode to interact with the VFS. However, a single
> > file can have multiple extent MFT records to store additional
> > attributes. These extent inodes are managed internally by the base
> > inode and do not need to be visible to the VFS.
>
> What are typical numbers of the extra extent inodes?  If they are rare,
> you might be able to simplify the code a bit by just always allocating
> the vfs_inode even if it's not really used.
Regarding the typical numbers, in most cases, It will require zero or
only a few extra extent inodes. Okay, I will move vfs_inode to
ntfs_inode.
Thanks!


>
> Nothing important, though - just thinking along.
>