linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available

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: <10742.1479507898@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2016 22:24:58 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] statx: Add a system call to make enhanced file info available

Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:

> > Definition: "Same as struct stat::st_blksize".
> 
> So it is still defined as "mostly useless", then? :/

If we're going to be able to emulate stat() with this, then st_blksize must be
determinable from whatever's in struct statx.  If you can provide something
better for stx_blksize and an algorithm for mapping that to st_blksize, then
please do so.

> The test suite should be developed concurrently with the code. You
> know, best software engineering practices and all that. Just a small
> example: Darrick landed 100+ reflink related tests in xfstests
> before we merged the XFS reflink functionality.

I can't give you tests to merge yet.  Given the amount of bikeshedding that's
taken place on this, I'm glad I *haven't* done the testsuite yet - it would
have much more than doubled the amount of work.  I *still* don't know what the
final form is going to be.  I've chucked out almost everything extra because
every bit has someone who argues with it - and this includes people who argue
against things that have to be there!

Further:

	warthog>ls xfstests-dev/doc
	CHANGES

The documentation is missing.  There's a bit in the top level README, but
there's a whole lot of information that *should* be there - and isn't.

David