linux-kernel - Re: Is it OK to export symbols 'getname' and 'putname'?

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]

Message-ID: <20150423053200.GA3585@fixme-laptop.cn.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Apr 2015 13:32:00 +0800
From:	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is it OK to export symbols 'getname' and 'putname'?

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:50:15PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 05:55:07PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Is that a good idea to export these symbols, given that lustre may be
> > > the only user? 
> >   Yes, it is a good idea.
> 
> It was if lustre was in core code and these idiotic ioctls were something
> we had to live with.
> 
> But lustre is in staging code, and we shouldn't export symbols just for
> shitty staging code.
> 
> Intead lustre should clean up their mess and get rid of these ioctls
> that do path name lookups.

OK, good point. Thank you!

Regards,
Boqun Feng

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped