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: <CA+55aFzn7RvHfbYkRmJZ2LWbAVHGBSPoAMQNkKh7DsOYX82_9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:30:21 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overlayfs fixes for 4.9-rc3

On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
> The feature that would be introduced is this: allow directory renames
> to work without having to recursively copy-up the subtree.  Whatever
> mechanism is devised to do this will be backward incompatible.  Maybe
> it's a misguided idea, but it's been through several rounds of reviews
> on the relevant mailing lists and there weren't any objections (yet).
>
> And the thing is, backward incompatibility is less of an issue for
> overlayfs than for normal filesystems, because it's usually not
> something people store their root filesystems on, and if so they can
> simply not turn off this feature.

(a) that should be explained

(b) that has nothing to do with being marked for stable

(c) that new doesn't actually explain in any way why you'd want
"feature flags" thing, for exactly the same "backwards incompatibility
is less of an issue" reason that you state.

Why not "just do it", in other words. For exactly the reasons you say.
Make it a mount option that people can choose to use or not.

> overlayfs relies on xattr to create opaque directories

Yes and no. It relies on it for THAT ONE FEATURE, which you don't have
to use. As far as I can tell, overlayfs does *not* rely on xattrs in
general.

               Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ