linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] ext4: Transparent Decompression Support

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: <20130725200939.GH26554@lenny.home.zabbo.net>
Date:	Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:09:39 -0700
From:	Zach Brown <zab@...hat.com>
To:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
Cc:	Dhaval Giani <dgiani@...illa.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tytso@....edu, tglek@...illa.com, vdjeric@...illa.com,
	glandium@...illa.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] ext4: Transparent Decompression Support

> > What about introducing a new flag, O_COMPR which tells the
> > kernel, btw, we want this file to be decompressed if it can be. It
> > can fallback to O_RDONLY or something like that? That gets rid of
> > the chattr ugliness.
> 
> How is that different from chattr ugliness, which also comes down to a
> single flag? ;)

It's much worse because it's per fd instead of per inode.

The page cache, where the undisclosed complexity of this proposal lurks,
where compressed and uncompressed cached copies of the data need to be
managed somehow, is per inode.

- z
(Hi Taras! :))
--
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