linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ramfs: ignore tmpfs options when we emulate it

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 14 Jun 2009 06:46:24 -0400
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To:	Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ramfs: ignore tmpfs options when we emulate it

On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 06:42, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 06:01:10PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> Sorry I take back the previous patch. It makes sense to not break
> existing user space tools, but a warning message looks OK to remind
> people of possibly unexpected behavior.
>
>                default:
>                        printk(KERN_ERR "ramfs: bad mount option: %s\n", p);
> -                       return -EINVAL;
> +                       break;

hmm, if the warning was wrapped in #ifdef CONFIG_SHMEM, i'd be ok with
this.  otherwise we end up with warnings that can (should) be ignored
when tmpfs is being emulated with ramfs.
-mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/