linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Use list.h instead of file_system

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: <20190504132008.GY23075@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Sat, 4 May 2019 14:20:08 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Carmeli Tamir <carmeli.tamir@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Use list.h instead of file_system_type next

On Sat, May 04, 2019 at 05:45:48AM -0400, Carmeli Tamir wrote:
> From: Tamir <carmeli.tamir@...il.com>
> 
> Changed file_system_type next field to list_head and refactored
> the code to use list.h functions.

... except that list_head is not a good match here.  For one thing,
we never walk that thing backwards.  For another, filesystem
can be used without ever going through register_filesystem(),
making your data structure quite a mess - e.g. use of list_empty()
(a perfectly normal list.h primitive) on it might oops on some
instances.

IOW, what you are making is not quite list_head and pretending it
to be list_head is asking for serious headache down the road.

Frankly, what's the point?  Reusing an existing data type, to
avoid DIY is generally a good advice, but then you'd better
make sure that existing type *does* fit your needs and that
your creation is playing by that type's rules.

This patch does neither...

NAKed-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>