linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] : Switch to use new generic UUID API

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:   Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:13:33 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Javier González <javier@...igon.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] : Switch to use new generic UUID API

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:45 PM Javier González <javier@...igon.com> wrote:
> > On 24 Jan 2019, at 14.36, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:19 PM Javier González <javier@...igon.com> wrote:
> >>> On 24 Jan 2019, at 13.16, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> >>> header.uuid is defined using __u8 type, I'm not sure we can use guid_t there.
> >>
> >> We can turn it into a guid_t and bump the minor version.
> >
> > It's not so easy. __uXX types are dedicated for external APIs. guid_t
> > is kernel internal type disregard of (still) presence some uapi bits.
> > So, the question is those __uXX types in the driver definition is a
> > simple mistake, (weird) style decision, or what?
> >
>
> I would define it as a mistake and I think it is worth fixing it. At the
> moment we are only using this uuid for recovery purposes, to discard
> data from a different pblk instance,

Does this come from outside of the kernel in any mean (user space,
data from device, etc)?
It sounds to me like it does. In this case there is no mistake and we
may not use guid_t there.

> so there should not be a big impact
> outside of pblk itself. Am I missing something?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko