linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] fsconfig: rename FSCONFIG_CMD_CREATE to FSCONFIG_CMD

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:   Fri, 21 Sep 2018 17:23:43 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] fsconfig: rename FSCONFIG_CMD_CREATE to FSCONFIG_CMD_OBTAIN

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 5:11 PM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> The old name strongly implies that a new superblock will be created from
>> the fs_context.  This is not true: filesystems are free to retuse an
>> existing superblock and return that (for good reason).
>
> Kind of like open(O_CREAT) only ever creates files, right;-)
>
> Actually, FSCONFIG_CMD_OPEN might be a better name.

We've already opened the context with fsopen() and about to open a
file referring to a subtree with fsmount().  And this one doesn't
actually involve opening any files, so IMO it should not be called
_OPEN.

Thanks,
Miklos