linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: Use separate super_operations structure for no

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20090501134912.GD7681@mit.edu>
Date:	Fri, 1 May 2009 09:49:12 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
Cc:	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: Use separate super_operations structure for
	no_journal filesystems

On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 04:42:53AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On May 01, 2009  00:37 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > @@ -3923,6 +3911,12 @@ static int __init init_ext4_fs(void)
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops = ext4_sops;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.write_super = ext4_write_super;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.sync_fs = 0;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.freeze_fs = 0;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.unfreeze_fs = 0;
> 
> I thought the general policy these days was to make a static const
> ops struct so that it cannot be changed (correctly or incorrectly)?

The tradeoff is this makes it much easier from a maintenance point of
view to see what the differences are between ext4_nojournal_sops and
ext4_journal_sops.

						- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html