linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 5 3/4] nfsd_open(): rename 'int access' to 'int may_flags' in nfsd

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: <4F8747A1.8060800@fastmail.fm>
Date:	Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:22:41 +0200
From:	Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
CC:	Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...m.fraunhofer.de>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...hat.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	yong.fan@...mcloud.com, sandeen@...hat.com, adilger@...mcloud.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5 3/4] nfsd_open(): rename 'int access' to 'int may_flags'
 in nfsd_open()

On 04/12/2012 10:49 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:32:45PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>> On 03/13/2012 10:29 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:09:05PM +0100, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>>> Hmm, there must have gone something wrong on merging,
>>>
>>> In that case one approach would be to rebase your last-sent patches on
>>> to the same base as Ted's versions, confirm that one still works and the
>>> other doesn't, and do a diff....
>>>
>>>> my own test
>>>> also fails
>>>>
>>>> http://www.pci.uni-heidelberg.de/tc/usr/bernd/downloads/test_seekdir/
>>>>
>>>> (Sorry, it does not say 'failure', but one needs to compare the file
>>>> names and telldir-offset numbers)
>>>>
>>>> I think I will continue in the morning as its already 1 a.m. here.
>>>
>>> OK, thanks for following up!
> 
> Stupid question: is there any fundamental feature of ext4 this depends
> on, or would this fix work equally well for fs/ext3?

First of all, Bruce and Ted, thanks a lot for your patience with those
patches!

I have not looked into it in detail yet, but it should be possible to
back port it to ext3. I don't think there is anything that would depend
on ext4. I also have ext3 on my todo list, but I first wanted to have it
in ext4 (in the sense of stability of ext3, if there still should be a
bug...) and I think for 3.4 it is too late now anyways. So unless there
are objections, lets target the back port to ext3 for 3.5?


Cheers,
Bernd
--
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