linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/14] Add commands to create or update a superblock

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: <20170511073857.GL390@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 11 May 2017 08:38:57 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     mszeredi@...hat.com, jlayton@...hat.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] Add commands to create or update a superblock

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 05:20:31PM +0100, David Howells wrote:

> @@ -64,8 +70,8 @@ struct sb_config_operations {
>  	int (*parse_option)(struct sb_config *sc, char *p);
>  	int (*monolithic_mount_data)(struct sb_config *sc, void *data);
>  	int (*validate)(struct sb_config *sc);
> -	struct dentry *(*mount)(struct sb_config *sc);
> -	int (*fill_super)(struct super_block *s, struct sb_config *sc);
> +	int (*create_super)(struct sb_config *sc);

Hell, NO.

The primary effect of that thing is *NOT* to create a superblock.  It
might be a side effect, and quite often it will happen, but the
real goal here is a mountable tree.  Which might or might not reside
on a new superblock.  And which might very well involve no object
creation whatsoever.

This name is actively misleading and the same goes for its relatives
(vfs_create_super(), etc.).  It's "give me a tree to mount", not
"create something or other".