linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 01/35] vfs: clean up dedup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 19:24:00 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/35] vfs: clean up dedup

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:07:52PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> +ssize_t vfs_dedupe_file_range_one(struct file *src_file, u64 src_pos, u64 len,
>> +                           struct file *dst_file, u64 dst_pos)
>
> Why u64 instead of loff_t?

Peculiarity of f_op->dedupe_file_range().

I think a cleanup of copyfile/clone/dedupe interfaces would be good.
Perhaps merge them into one?  Or just merge copyfile/clone?  Even if
not merging it should make sense to make argument types and argument
order the same.

Thanks,
Miklos