linux-kernel - Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24)

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: <3ae72650711020650l37870e45yb853f888b4807116@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 2 Nov 2007 14:50:41 +0100
From:	"Kay Sievers" <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To:	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
	"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Jens Axboe" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	"Fengguang Wu" <fengguang.wu@...il.com>,
	"Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	"Miklos Szeredi" <miklos@...redi.hu>
Subject: Re: per BDI dirty limit (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.24)

On Nov 2, 2007 2:15 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> Thanks for the help so far, however we're still not quite there.
>
> The below patch still has the funny 20 character name limit. Is there a
> good reason its a char array like this, and not just a char * to a kstr?
> The code does kstrdup all over the place, I can't imagine why suddenly
> limiting it to 20 chars seems like a good idea.

You are absolutely right, it doesn't make any sense. The 20 char limit
is bad, but really,
having the name duplicated in the device structure, while the name is
already in the
embedded kobject, is really bad.

Greg recently got rid of the 20 chars in the kobject, now we need to fix the
devices to completely get rid of the static bus_id string array, and just set
the kobject name directly.
It's all long overdue to fix things like this in the driver core -
it's such a mess. After the
kset cleanup Greg and I are doing currently, we will remove that silly limit.

Hmm, regardless of the limit, isn't there a better device name than a memory
address of a kernel structure. :) If there is no better data,
shouldn't we get something
like an atomic counter somewhere in the nfs code, which just increases
with every
instance, and we could use that number as a connection id?

Kay
-
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/