linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] fs: enhance and rename shutdown() callback to remove

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: <baec02a0-e2fb-4801-b2ad-f602fc4d1cfc@gmx.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 16:05:03 +0930
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@...e.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz,
 linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
 ntfs3@...ts.linux.dev, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] fs: enhance and rename shutdown() callback to
 remove_bdev()



在 2025/7/1 15:44, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 03:02:34PM +0930, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> To allow those multi-device filesystems to be integrated to use
>> fs_holder_ops:
>>
>> - Rename shutdown() call back to remove_bdev()
>>    To better describe when the call back is called.
> 
> What is renamed back here?

Rename the old shutdown to remove_bdev().

> 
>> -static void exfat_shutdown(struct super_block *sb)
>> +static void exfat_shutdown(struct super_block *sb, struct block_device *bdev)
>>   {
>>   	exfat_force_shutdown(sb, EXFAT_GOING_DOWN_NOSYNC);
>>   }
>> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static const struct super_operations exfat_sops = {
>>   	.put_super	= exfat_put_super,
>>   	.statfs		= exfat_statfs,
>>   	.show_options	= exfat_show_options,
>> -	.shutdown	= exfat_shutdown,
>> +	.remove_bdev	= exfat_shutdown,
> 
> Please also rename the function so that they match the method name.

I prefer not, and it is intentionally left as is.

This give us a very clear view what a fs is expected to do.

If a fs can only shutdown when losing any device, a read won't need to 
dig into the details, just looking at that line will tell us what is the 
behavior.

Thanks,
Qu