linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] Rearrange i_flags to be consistent with FS_IOC

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]

Date:	Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:45:25 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rearrange i_flags to be consistent with FS_IOC_GETFLAGS

Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:

> I'd prefer generic flags are not dependent on fixed values from a
> specific filesystem several layers down the storage stack.

They're not so dependent.  They're based on the FS_IOC_[GS]ETFLAGS ioctl which
even XFS translates its flags for.  These ioctl flags must now remain
invariant.  Whilst they might have originated as Ext2/3/4 flags, they're now
independent of that.

> Also, if the problem you are trying to solve is overhead of calculating the
> flags for stat() on RISC architectures, then I'd argue that XFS is just as
> important target for such an optimisation because it is widely used in small
> ARM and MIPS based NAS appliances....

This can be argued one way or another, however aligning i_flags with something
would probably be an improvement somewhere.  Most of what I deal with is Ext3/4
based, and BTRFS-based is likely to become important too.

David
--
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