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  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]
Date:   Sat, 5 Nov 2016 08:44:51 +0200
From:   Amir Goldstein <>
To:     Linus Torvalds <>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        linux-fsdevel <>,
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] overlayfs fixes for 4.9-rc3

On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Linus Torvalds
<> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Miklos Szeredi <> wrote:
>> Also introduce the concept of feature flags to allow backward incompatible
>> changes to the overlay format.  This should have been there from day one; the
>> best we can do now is backport to stable kernels.  Add the check for features
>> without adding any actual features yet.
> No. I pulled the three other commits, but not that last one.
> That feature just seems to actively *encourage* backwards incompatible
> features. It's a bad idea. Don't do it. If we've been able to do
> without it so far, then why should we suddenly start doing things like
> this?
> So I don't agree that it should have been there since day one, it just
> shouldn't exist at all.


Can you please clarify your objection?

I suppose you do not object to the concept of on-disk format version nor on-disk
format compatible/incompatible features sets.
Just to fact that overlayfs didn't have those form day one, so it
should find a way
to cope with that situation without patching stable kernels?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists