linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC 1/2] ext4 resize: Mark the added group with EXT4_BG_INODE

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]

Date:	Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:09:44 -0700
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Solofo.Ramangalahy@...l.net, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] ext4 resize: Mark the added group with
	EXT4_BG_INODE_ZEROED flag

On Nov 27, 2008  17:35 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Unfortunately, we've been shipping mke2fs in e2fsprogs that sets the
> EXT4_BG_INODE_ZERO for newly created filesystem, and if the
> lazy_itable_init configuration parameter is set, it doesn't initialize
> the inode table and leaves bg_flags set to EXT2_BG_INODE_UNINIT and
> EXT2_BG_BLOCK_UNINIT. 
> 
> Distributions are already shipping e2fsprogs with this, and there are
> ext4 filesystems out there in the wild, so it is indeed probably way
> too late to change this.

I suppose it would be possible to add a new flag and deprecate the old
INODE_ZERO usage after a couple of years.  Until we start doing anything
with the kernel we've done everything with mke2fs to zero the inode table,
so that would be a reasonable assumption for the kernel to make.

I agree that having the flag with the opposite meaning would have been
better, but hindsight is 20-20.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html