On Thu 2009-02-05 09:19:28, jim owens wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> If you don't want it, don't compile it in. The Kconfig text is very
>>> clear.
>>
>> No, I'd not expect that option to panic systems. That's why I
>> suggested:
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/xfs/Kconfig b/fs/xfs/Kconfig
>> index 29228f
Pavel Machek wrote:
If you don't want it, don't compile it in. The Kconfig text is very
clear.
No, I'd not expect that option to panic systems. That's why I
suggested:
diff --git a/fs/xfs/Kconfig b/fs/xfs/Kconfig
index 29228f5..b7ac847 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/Kconfig
+++ b/fs/xfs/Kconfig
@@ -77,4
On Thu 2009-02-05 08:02:39, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 10:02 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > CONFIG_*_DEBUG means include *debug* code there to help developers,
> > > > > including adding additional failure tests into the kernel. Besides,
> > > > > which bit of "don't turn it o
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 10:02 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > CONFIG_*_DEBUG means include *debug* code there to help developers,
> > > > including adding additional failure tests into the kernel. Besides,
> > > > which bit of "don't turn it on unless you are an XFS developer"
> > > > don't you un
> > > CONFIG_*_DEBUG means include *debug* code there to help developers,
> > > including adding additional failure tests into the kernel. Besides,
> > > which bit of "don't turn it on unless you are an XFS developer"
> > > don't you understand?
> >
> > Yes, but DEBUG code is normally to help deb
On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 07:29:51PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sun 2009-02-01 12:40:50, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 05:27:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Wed 2009-01-21 15:00:42, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > + Turning this option on will result in kernel panicking an
On Sun 2009-02-01 12:40:50, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 05:27:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Wed 2009-01-21 15:00:42, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:20:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > On Tue 2009-01-20 08:28:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 05:27:11PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2009-01-21 15:00:42, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:20:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Tue 2009-01-20 08:28:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > I think that was the issue with the debug builds. If
On Wed 2009-01-21 15:00:42, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:20:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Tue 2009-01-20 08:28:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:59:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > > So far the responses from xfs folks have been disapp
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> I already tested squashfs. One issue is basically a problem with
> the zlib-api for which i just posted a patch here
> http://marc.info/?t=12321280733&r=1&w=2
>
Thanks for testing Squashfs. I've not ignored your emails, but I've
been
* Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> On Tue 2009-01-20 18:34:55, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:15:03AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > > * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:20:19PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2009-01-20 08:28:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:59:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > So far the responses from xfs folks have been disappointing, if you are
> > > > interested in bugreports i c
On Tue 2009-01-20 08:28:29, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:59:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > So far the responses from xfs folks have been disappointing, if you are
> > > interested in bugreports i can send you some.
> >
> > Sure I am. It would be good if you could s
On Tue 2009-01-20 18:34:55, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:15:03AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:31:50AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > > >
* Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:15:03AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:31:50AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > > * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> > > > > Does ext2/3 a
* Chris Mason (chris.ma...@oracle.com) wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 07:31 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> >
> > > Does ext2/3 and vfat survive that kind of attacks? Those are 'in
> > > production' and should survive it...
> >
> > I regular
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:59:44PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > So far the responses from xfs folks have been disappointing, if you are
> > interested in bugreports i can send you some.
>
> Sure I am. It would be good if you could start testing XFS along
> with all the other filesystems and rep
On Tue, 2009-01-20 at 07:31 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
>
> > Does ext2/3 and vfat survive that kind of attacks? Those are 'in
> > production' and should survive it...
>
> I regularly (once or twice a week) test 100 corrupted images of
> vfat,
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:15:03AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> * Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:31:50AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> > > > Does ext2/3 and vfat survive that kind of attacks? Those are 'in
>
* Dave Chinner (da...@fromorbit.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:31:50AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> > > Does ext2/3 and vfat survive that kind of attacks? Those are 'in
> > > production' and should survive it...
> >
> > I regularly (once or tw
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 07:31:50AM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> * Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> > Does ext2/3 and vfat survive that kind of attacks? Those are 'in
> > production' and should survive it...
>
> I regularly (once or twice a week) test 100 corrupted images of
> vfat, udf, m
Hi!
> > > > Thanks for looking at things
> > > >
> > > > Aside from catching checksumming errors, we're not quite ready for
> > > > fuzzer style attacks. The code will be hardened for this but it isn't
> > > > yet.
> > >
> > > Does this mean i should stop trying to break it for now or are you
Hi,
* Pavel Machek (pa...@suse.cz) wrote:
> On Tue 2009-01-13 15:43:07, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > * Chris Mason (chris.ma...@oracle.com) wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i
On Tue 2009-01-13 15:43:07, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> * Chris Mason (chris.ma...@oracle.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the
> > > following warning and bug message. The im
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:43 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> * Chris Mason (chris.ma...@oracle.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the
> > > following warning and bug message.
* Chris Mason (chris.ma...@oracle.com) wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the
> > following warning and bug message. The image can be found here
> > www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/btrfs.2.img.b
On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the
> following warning and bug message. The image can be found here
> www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/btrfs.2.img.bck.bz2
Thanks for looking at things
Aside from catching
Hi,
when mounting an intentionally corrupted btrfs filesystem i get the
following warning and bug message. The image can be found here
www.cccmz.de/~snakebyte/btrfs.2.img.bck.bz2
[ 297.406152] device fsid e14cf01de423381a-4bd40b603870018a <6>devid
2147483649 transid 9 /dev/loop0
[ 297.411937]
28 matches
Mail list logo
