linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 2/6] [RFC] Create the .relink file

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 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:	Sun, 26 Sep 2010 12:08:37 -0700
From:	Brad Boyer <flar@...andria.com>
To:	Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com>
Cc:	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] [RFC] Create the .relink file_operation

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 02:53:28PM -0700, Matt Helsley wrote:
> Not all filesystems will necessarily be able to support relinking an
> orphan inode back into the filesystem. Some offlist feedback suggested
> that instead of overloading .link that relinking should be a separate
> file operation for this reason.
> 
> Since .relink is a superset of .link make the VFS call .relink where
> possible and .link otherwise.
> 
> The next commit will change ext3/4 to enable this operation.

I may have missed something in one of these patches (patch 1 and any
original summary if there was one don't appear in my email), but
what is the point of the new operation? I didn't see any case that
treats one any different than the other. What is disallowed (and how)
for a driver which does not implement .relink but has .link?

	Brad Boyer
	flar@...andria.com

--
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