Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CACHEFILES uses PROC_FS, so make it a Kconfig depends.
Thanks, but the new and improved CacheFiles doesn't use procfs as Christoph
Hellwig objects to such a practice. In any case, Andrew Morton has dropped it
from -mm as it's now obsolete.
David
-
To
On Fri, 17 November 2006 06:50:37 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 08:43:00AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
+/* convert an inode address into an unsigned int and xor it with a random
value
+ * determined at boot time */
+static inline unsigned int inode_to_uint (struct
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 06:50 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 08:43:00AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
+/* convert an inode address into an unsigned int and xor it with a random
value
+ * determined at boot time */
+static inline unsigned int inode_to_uint (struct inode
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 08:43:00AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
2) this scheme would effectively leak inode addresses into userspace.
I'm not sure if that would be exploitable, but it's probably best not to
do it. The patch adds a static unsigned int that is initialized to a
random value at boot
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 15:14 +0100, Jörn Engel wrote:
If you are talking about inode_init_once() here, I like the idea.
i_generation must be initialized somehow, even a 4-byte information
leak could be a problem. But the initialization should happen in the
rare event of allocating a slab page,
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 07:24 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I *think* the xor mask is mere obfuscation. It looks likely that you can
recover it with a little bit of trial and error. If you can force the
filesystem to hand you back new inodes quickly such that there is a high
probability you get
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 09:01 -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
Wouldn't you only be able to only crack a few of the low-order bits due
to a cluster of inodes being sequential? I don't think you'd be able
crack enough of it to be useful. You may be able to determine where
some inodes are relative
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 10:06 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 09:01 -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
Wouldn't you only be able to only crack a few of the low-order bits due
to a cluster of inodes being sequential? I don't think you'd be able
crack enough of it to be useful. You
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 09:21 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
Because the lower 8-9 bits of the inode pointer aren't significant
(presuming an inode struct size of ~400-800 bytes). If we take those out
of the picture then we extend the range of addresses that we can
uniquely squish into a 32 bit
From: Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fix hpfs printk warnings:
(why do I only see these in -mm?)
fs/hpfs/dir.c:87: warning: format '%08x' expects type 'unsigned int', but
argument 3 has type 'long unsigned int'
fs/hpfs/dir.c:147: warning: format '%08x' expects type 'unsigned int', but
argument
From: Randy Dunlap [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DLM uses/needs SYSFS (kernel_subsys).
This also prevents DLM from being able to select CONFIGFS,
which also uses SYSFS and caused yet another build error.
Also fix Kconfig help text formatting to use kernel indentation
convention.
(It seems odd that the menu
11 matches
Mail list logo
