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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 04:49:48 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com, maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, david@...ma-star.at, david@...morbit.com, dedekind1@...il.com, alex@...tthing.co, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sasha.levin@...cle.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, rvaswani@...eaurora.org, tony.luck@...el.com, shailendra.capricorn@...il.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, hch@...radead.org, hughd@...gle.com, mgorman@...hsingularity.net, vbabka@...e.cz Subject: Re: UBIFS and page migration (take 3) Hi Richard, the series looks fine to me, but it fails to address the root cause: that we have an inherently dangerous default for ->migratepage that assumes that file systems are implemented a certain way. I think the series should also grow a third patch to remove the default and just wire it up for the known good file systems, although we'd need some input on what known good is. Any idea what filesystems do get regular testing with code that's using CMA? A good approximation might be those that use the bufer_head based aops from fs/buffer.c
Powered by blists - more mailing lists