linux-ext4 - Re: Mixup with name_len & 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 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: <20130308004438.GA29720@thunk.org>
Date:	Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:44:38 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Mixup with name_len & file_type in e2fsprogs

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 07:24:44PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
>   I was thinking some more about it. Won't it be cleaner (and not much
> harder) if we always used ext2_dir_entry_2 in e2fsprogs and properly did
> byte swapping of name_len only if FILETYPE feature isn't enabled? I've
> checked and it would mean changing prototypes of like 8 functions in
> ext2fs.h (or better provide new functions with struct ext2_dir_entry_2
> argument) which doesn't seem too bad... This solution seems to be the least
> surprising to the users of libext2fs (esp. if they do some scanning of
> directory blocks themselves or so).

What worries me is potential ABI breackages if we try to redefine
existing interfaces as using ext2_dir_entry_2.  And I'm not convinced
it's worth it to create new versions of the functions that use the new
structure.  This is why I suggested using accessor functions....

	    	    	  	    	  	   - 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