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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 16:38:39 +0200
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <>
Cc:     Kees Cook <>, Tony Luck <>,
        Nick Terrell <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] pstore: Use zstd directly by default for compression

On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 16:11, Guilherme G. Piccoli <> wrote:
> On 18/10/2022 05:20, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > [...]
> > So again, I suggest to simply drop this non-feature, and standardize
> > on either zlib or zstd using the library interface exclusively. If
> > someone present a compelling use case, we can always consider adding
> > it back in some form.
> >
> > As for the choice of algorithm, given the equal performance using the
> > default compression level, and the difference in code size, I don't
> > see why zstd should be preferred here. If anything, it only increases
> > the likelihood of hitting another error if we are panicking due to
> > some memory corruption issue.
> I think it's a good argument - would zlib be simpler in code than zstd?

I think it should be rather straight-forward. Note that this is what
we had before 2016 when all the 'features' were starting to get added.

> I've checked the zstd patch from Kees - not complex per se, but would be
> great if we could have a simple mechanism, without the need of the ifdef
> there for example...
> Cheers,
> Guilherme

Powered by blists - more mailing lists