From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964815AbWGYS2K (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:28:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751468AbWGYS2K (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:28:10 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:33173 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751469AbWGYS2I (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:28:08 -0400 Message-ID: <44C66296.2010109@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:27:34 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060614) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Neil Brown CC: Andrew Morton , Theodore Tso , jack@suse.cz, 20@madingley.org, marcel@holtmann.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sct@redhat.com, adilger@clusterfs.com Subject: Re: Bad ext3/nfs DoS bug References: <20060718145614.GA27788@circe.esc.cam.ac.uk> <1153236136.10006.5.camel@localhost> <20060718152341.GB27788@circe.esc.cam.ac.uk> <1153253907.21024.25.camel@localhost> <20060719092810.GA4347@circe.esc.cam.ac.uk> <20060719155502.GD3270@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <17599.2754.962927.627515@cse.unsw.edu.au> <20060720160639.GF25111@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <17600.30372.397971.955987@cse.unsw.edu.au> <20060721170627.4cbea27d.akpm@osdl.org> <20060722131759.GC7321@thunk.org> <20060724185604.9181714c.akpm@osdl.org> <17605.33733.51148.46400@cse.unsw.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <17605.33733.51148.46400@cse.unsw.edu.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Neil Brown wrote: > Putting it another way, > ext3_get_dentry reject certain inums that are known to be a problem. > ext2_get_dentry allows only those inums that could possibly be ok. > > So if you (anyone) prefer one approach over the other, making the > change so they both fs take the same approach would be trivial. I like the 2nd approach - seems simpler, takes care of everything in ->get_dentry, right?. But I think your original patch is all that will work for 2.4 kernels... -Eric