linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

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]

Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2017 06:25:31 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
Cc:     "Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: headers: potential UAPI headers

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:20:15PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2017, at 02:24, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:33:11PM +0000, James Simmons wrote:
> >> 
> >>>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:06:47PM -0500, James Simmons wrote:
> >>>>>> Not for landing. This is the purposed UAPI headers
> >>>>>> with the removal of unlikely and debugging macros.
> >>>>>> This is just for feedback to see if this is acceptable
> >>>>>> for the upstream client.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> .../lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_fid.h      | 353 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>> .../lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_ostid.h    | 233 ++++++++++++++
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Can you make a lustre "uapi" directory so we can see which files you
> >>>>> really want to be UAPI and which you don't as time goes on?

I said that ^^^

> >>>> Where do you want them placed? In uapi/linux/lustre or uapi/lustre. Does
> >>>> it matter to you? The below was to forth coming UAPI headers which from
> >>>> your response you seem okay with in general.
> >>> 
> >>> How many .h files are there going to be?  It's just a single filesystem,
> >>> shouldn't you just need a single file?  If so, how about
> >>> 	drivers/staging/lustre/include/uapi/lustre.h
> >>> ?
> >>> 
> >>> If you really need multiple .h files, put them all in the same uapi/
> >>> directory with a lustre_ prefix, you don't need a whole subdir just for
> >>> yourself, right?
> >> 
> >> We have 12 UAPI headers and yes they all begin with lustre_*. Okay I will
> >> create a driver/staging/lustre/include/uapi/linux directory and start
> >> moving headers there.
> > 
> > 12 seems like a lot just for a single, tiny, filesystem :)
> > 
> > But moving them all to a single directory will see where we can later
> > merge them together, sounds like a good plan.
> 
> Greg,
> are you really adamantly against moving the Lustre headers into their own lustre/
> subdirectory?

I did not say that.

Please, when responding to 5 month old email messages, get your quoting
correct...

greg k-h