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:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 18:11:24 -0600
From:   Eric Sandeen <>
To:     Linus Torvalds <>,
        David Howells <>
Cc:     Eric Sandeen <>,
        Miklos Szeredi <>,
        Ira Weiny <>,
        linux-fsdevel <>,
        linux-man <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        xfs <>,
        Ext4 Developers List <>,
        Xiaoli Feng <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] statx: move STATX_ATTR_DAX attribute handling to

On 12/1/20 4:09 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So basically, the thing that argues against this patch is that it
> seems to just duplicate things inside filesystems, when the VFS layter
> already has the information.
> Now, if the VFS information was possibly stale or wrong, that woudl be
> one thing. But then we'd have other and bigger  problems elsewhere as
> far as I can tell.
> IOW - make generic what can be made generic, and try to avoid having
> filesystems do their own thing.
> [ Replace "filesystems" by "architectures" or whatever else, this is
> obviously not a filesystem-specific rule in general. ]
> And don't get me wrong - I don't _hate_ the patch, and I don't care
> _that_ deeply, but it just doesn't seem to make any sense to me. My
> initial query was really about "what am I missing - can you please
> flesh out the commit message because I don't understand what's wrong".

Backing way up, my motivation was: Only the filesystem can appropriately
set the statx->attributes_mask, so it has to be done there. Since that
has to be done in the filesystem, set the actual attribute flag adjacent
to it, as is done for ~every other flag.


In any case I resent the flag value clash fix on a separate thread as
V2, hopefully that one is straightforward enough to go in.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists