linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] mount API series

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: <CAJfpegtJwkrFECtLBzm8WrYhhDjbQSAuB4ZsoDzbKh6T7UZJUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 Oct 2018 21:49:59 +0100
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] mount API series

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 7:39 PM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>> My objections fundamentally is that I can find real problems when I look
>> at the code.

I think the big risk with such a change is not that there are bugs,
but that we get the API wrong, and have to keep supporting a broken
API forever.

Were any of your objections of that type?

There's the argument about sharing of super blocks doing weird things,
but we can't get rid of that one due to having to support the old
mount(2) API forever anyway.  That's not a new burden, and the new API
allows fixing this incrementally by adding better models later.

Thanks,
Miklos