From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1766886AbXDSRP6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:15:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1766888AbXDSRP6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:15:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:53567 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1766886AbXDSRP4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:15:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4627A3C3.8050108@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:15:47 -0400 From: Chuck Ebbert Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Cox CC: Marat Buharov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: why UDF have so ugly filesize limit? References: <698310e10704190655j1263035bi77c5f551db510646@mail.gmail.com> <46279F3B.8050807@redhat.com> <20070419181221.59c3c7bd@the-village.bc.nu> In-Reply-To: <20070419181221.59c3c7bd@the-village.bc.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:56:27 -0400 > Chuck Ebbert wrote: > >> Marat Buharov wrote: >>> from fs/udf/super.c: >>> in function udf_fill_super >>> sb->s_maxbytes = 1<<30; (1 GB) >>> >>> Why sb->s_maxbytes is not equal to MAX_LFS_FILESIZE? >>> >> Patches to fix that are in the -mm kernel already (and in >> Fedora Core 6 latest update.) > > Good to know, presumably these also fix the underlying UDF problems in the > UDF filesystem code that caused it to be put there in the first pace ? > > (Security CVE-2006-4145) Yeah, the patches are by Jan Kara who put the original limitation in there as a temporary band-aid.