linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cramfs: generate unique inode number for better inode cache usage

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: <AANLkTi=6LPBAFu6r75RSYjndCk_P9tDH=bavO3j4c1Rq@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Dec 2010 08:45:58 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	stefani@...bold.net
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cramfs: generate unique inode number for better inode
 cache usage

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:31 AM,  <stefani@...bold.net> wrote:
>
> Pekka's approach is not problem. But the "cruddy" CRAMINO_UNIQ() is exact
> what is needed. In your orginal design of cramfs there is no way to give
> entries with no data an unique inode number.

Umm. And my cramino() did exactly that. If it has a data pointer, it
uses that, otherwise it uses the directory offset.

It just doesn't care about the mode of the file.

(feel free to test the size too, for that matter - that's what the old
code does)

IOW, it uses the old CRAMINO() approach, except instead of "1" for the
non-offset case, it uses "dirent_offset+1"

                   Linus
--
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/