linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] ocfs2 changes for 2.6.32

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090922005134.20722.qmail@science.horizon.com>
Date:	21 Sep 2009 20:51:34 -0400
From:	"George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To:	Joel.Becker@...cle.com
Cc:	linux@...izon.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ocfs2 changes for 2.6.32

> Perhaps ->copyfile takes the following flags:
>
> #define ALLOW_COW_SHARED	0x0001
> #define REQUIRE_COW_SHARED	0x0002
> #define REQUIRE_BASIC_ATTRS	0x0004
> #define REQUIRE_FULL_ATTRS	0x0008
> #define REQUIRE_ATOMIC		0x0010
> #define SNAPSHOT		(REQUIRE_COW_SHARED |
>				 REQUIRE_BASIC_ATTRS |
>				 REQUIRE_ATOMIC)
> #define SNAPSHOT_PRESERVE	(SNAPSHOT | REQUIRE_FULL_ATTRS)

Um, could I strongly suggest that flags == 0 be the "succeed if at all
possible case", and various options limit it.

In particular, invert ALLOW_COW_SHARED to REQUIRE_ALLOCATE.

Another possibly useful flag would be REQUIRE_OPTIMIZED.
I.e. if it's not appreciably faster than a read/write loop, perhaps
the application would prefer to do it itself.

We also have to define the error code to return in case of a flag
violation.  ENOTSUP?
--
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/