linux-ext4 - Re: [2/2] ext4: Provide separate operations for sysfs feature files

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Sep 2014 11:28:47 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2/2] ext4: Provide separate operations for sysfs feature files

On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 01:32:20PM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> Currently sysfs feature files uses ext4_attr_ops as the file operations
> to show/store data. However the feature files is not supposed to contain
> any data at all, the sole existence of the file means that the module
> support the feature. Moreover, none of the sysfs feature attributes
> actually register show/store functions so that would not be a problem.
> 
> However if a sysfs feature attribute register a show or store function
> we might be in trouble because the kobject in this case is _not_ embedded
> in the ext4_sb_info structure as ext4_attr_show/store expect.
> 
> So just to be safe, provide separate empty sysfs_ops to use in
> ext4_feat_ktype. This might safe us from potential problems in the
> future. As a bonus we can "store" something more descriptive than
> nothing in the files, so let it contain "enabled" to make it clear that
> the feature is really present in the module.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>

Applied, thanks.

					- 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