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

Date:	Thu, 25 Nov 2010 13:12:38 +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 Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 09:11:13AM +0100, Marco Stornelli wrote:
>> 2010/11/24 Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>:
>> > 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.
>
> Do you have more details on this? You can easily check for unsupportable
> configurations with mount options and bail out accordingly.
>
>> 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.
>>
> I'm not sure what your point is. It's not a general purpose file system,
> but that's not an excuse for taking shortcuts. Out of the boards on my
> desk, I have at least 3 that could make use of this file system where I
> could use both XIP and non-XIP for different stores out of the box. I
> wouldn't exactly call it a corner case. Also, as Tony's patch set
> demonstrates, these sorts of non-volatile data stores are common enough
> in the server space to make pramfs an option there, too. Please lose this
> mentality that because something was originally tasked for embedded it's
> perfectly acceptable to ship a crippled interface.

I'm not responsible if someone uses something outside its scope, you
can use FAT on a flash but you can't claim reliability. However since
I'm a collaborative person I'll try to fix it, implementing where
possible a mount option.

>
> As it is, this is something that will have to be rewritten one way or the
> other, but whether that happens in or out of staging/ is not such a big
> concern.
>

Good.

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/