From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltaXIgJ8+GLWNvZGVyL3BoY29kZXInIFNlcmJpbmVua28=?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix minixfs size check Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 00:33:52 +0200 Message-ID: <4FB18850.8090704@gmail.com> References: <4FAFBBC7.9020101@gmail.com> <20120514221948.GV5353@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6090094148AF6DB53ADA9E9D" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kara Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120514221948.GV5353@quack.suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6090094148AF6DB53ADA9E9D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 15.05.2012 00:19, Jan Kara wrote: > On Sun 13-05-12 15:48:55, Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wr= ote: >> minixfs file size check is buggy and it doesn't allow creating a block= which >> can't be fully filled > Umm, I'm not really minix expert but who'd set s_max_size to somethin= g > which is not a multiple of block size? This looks rather artifical prob= lem > to me... >=20 The usual and natural limit comes from interpreting 32-bit size field as signed or unsigned. So it's either 2G - 1 or 4G - 1. Neither of which is a multiple of block size. --=20 Regards Vladimir '=CF=86-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko --------------enig6090094148AF6DB53ADA9E9D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iF4EAREKAAYFAk+xiFoACgkQNak7dOguQgng6gD/TsKeks/ncOwvFSrYPi3jtOdW l+ogoa539pHPSHqHQloA/Arn4PM8X5H23cKy9RLAnppkvywLA9JbgcsPVhg3iBi6 =pQJG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig6090094148AF6DB53ADA9E9D--