linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] ensure i_ino uniqueness in filesystems without permanent inode numbers (via idr)

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: <45723CDB.1060304@redhat.com>
Date:	Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:56:27 -0500
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Brad Boyer <flar@...andria.com>
CC:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ensure i_ino uniqueness in filesystems without permanent
 inode numbers (via idr)

Brad Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 12:21:36PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> Here's an updated (but untested) patch based on your suggestions. I also went
>> ahead and made the exported symbols GPL-only since that seems like it would be
>> appropriate here. Any further thoughts on it?
> 

> This seems like exactly the sort of thing that should be a generic
> service available to all filesystem implementors whether it's GPL or
> not. The usual justification for GPL-only is that it's something
> random modules shouldn't be touching anyway, but it's something that
> some part of the tree which could be a module needs.

My main reasoning for doing this was that the structures involved are 
per-superblock. There is virtually no reason that a filesystem would 
ever need to touch these structures in another filesystem.

So, this is essentially a service to make it easy for filesystems to 
implement i_ino uniqueness. I'm not terribly interested in making things 
easier for proprietary filesystems, so I don't see a real reason to make 
this available to them. They can always implement their own scheme to do 
this.

I'm certainly open to discussion though. Is there a compelling reason to 
open this up to proprietary software authors?

-- Jeff

-
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/