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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKYAXd8utJ-Ejs-1o4qd=ZRYGPoeTuCzbAWpAe_8mPRpJqrgBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 16:03:18 +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 Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 3:45 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 01:27:55PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote:
> > 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.
>
> This was just thinking out loud.  If it doesn't help to significantly
> simplify things, don't bother.
Okay, I will check it.
Thanks!
>
>