[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170412071551.i36yj3lzilgtntdy@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 09:15:51 +0200
From: Oleksij Rempel <ore@...gutronix.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, dedekind1@...il.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Steffen Trumtrar <s.trumtrar@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] fs: ubifs: set s_uuid in super block
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:48:28PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:43:26PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > Artem, do you remember why UBIFS didn't set s_uuid in first place?
>
> It's an extremely odd field - only a hand full of file systems set it
> (e.g. XFS doesn't, although according to Mimi IMA supports XFS), and
> it's never even used outside of the IMA/EVM code.
>
> We really need a feature flag that this field is valid that IMA can
> check before adding more support for it.
It seems to be used by mm/cleancache.c
void __cleancache_init_shared_fs()
but this affects only ocfs2.
So, if some flag should be implemented, who should do it? :)
If me, what flag should be created?
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists