linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/16 v4] pramfs: file operations

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: <AANLkTinF2NX9e7deTvDa8zQ0PA4u0ch0xrNWk0FaqvGV@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:11:13 +0100
From:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
To:	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Cc:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Embedded <linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16 v4] pramfs: file operations

2010/11/24 Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:58:40AM +0100, Marco Stornelli wrote:
>> diff -Nurp linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/file.c linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/file.c
>> --- linux-2.6.36-orig/fs/pramfs/file.c        1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
>> +++ linux-2.6.36/fs/pramfs/file.c     2010-09-24 18:34:03.000000000 +0200
>> @@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
>> +/*
>> + * FILE NAME fs/pramfs/file.c
>> + *
>> + * BRIEF DESCRIPTION
>> + *
>> + * File operations for files.
>> + *
> This FILE NAME / BRIEF DESCRIPTION thing should probably die, it's also
> not used consistently throughout the series.

Maybe yes, it's more a problem then a advantage :)

>
>> +static int pram_open_file(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>> +{
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_PRAMFS_XIP
>> +     /* Without XIP we force to use Direct IO */
>> +     filp->f_flags |= O_DIRECT;
>> +#endif
>> +     return generic_file_open(inode, filp);
>> +}
>> +
> Relying on a config option for this is in violently poor taste. Rely on
> the config option to enable/disable XIP support as you like, but whether
> it's actually mounted XIP or not should really depend be determined by a
> mount option. Presently you have no way of dealing with the file system
> being mounted multiple times with mixed XIP and non-XIP, which doesn't
> seem like a particularly exotic configuration. As you seem to have copied

Maybe on embedded, it could be.

> most of this from ext2, I'm curious why you opted to hardcode this
> instead of maintaining the flexibility that ext2 XIP has over this.
>

First of all because it was simpler :) In addition there was some
design problem to use it in combination with the memory protection.
The difference with ext2 is that we aren't talking about a general
purpose fs used (mainly) on normal desktop/server systems, but a
specific fs for embedded world, so I think some little constraints are
ok.

Marco
--
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/