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 interested > > > in further reports? > > > > 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, msdos, swap, iso9660, ext2, ext3, ext4, minix, bfs, befs, > hfs, hfs+, qnx4, affs and cramfs on each of my two test machines. > > They are all pretty stable, one remaining thing on my list i didnt have > time to look into was an issue with fat (msdos) triggering a bug in > buffer.c the other is a warning with ext4 in jbd2/checkpoint.c:166 Good, I did not expect filesystems to be in so good state. Thanks! Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
