linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification Filesystem

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: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0609031941210.12800@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date:	Sun, 3 Sep 2006 19:42:53 +0200 (MEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, akpm@...l.org, viro@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification
 Filesystem

>> > This set of patches constitutes Unionfs version 2.0. We are presenting it to
>> > be reviewed and considered for inclusion into the kernel.
>> 
>> Small nit: is it possible to order these patches so that the kernel
>> builds at each intermediate point (so we can use git bisect).  The
>> easiest way to achieve this would be to do the Kconfig and Makefile
>> updates last.
>
>Ideally, when Unionfs is commited into git, the whole thing would be one
>commit - what's the point of having half of a filesystem?

So that you can eliminate e.g. locking bugs by searching in less code.



Jan Engelhardt
-- 

-- 
VGER BF report: H 0
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/