linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 11/24] erofs: introduce xattr & posixacl support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <12d37c63-dd0e-04fb-91f8-f4b930e867e5@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 14:30:55 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To:     <dsterba@...e.cz>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>,
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        "Dave Chinner" <david@...morbit.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>, Miao Xie <miaoxie@...wei.com>,
        Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@...wei.com>,
        Fang Wei <fangwei1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 11/24] erofs: introduce xattr & posixacl support

On 2019/9/2 22:20, David Sterba wrote:
> Oh right, I think the reasons are historical and that we can remove the
> options nowadays. From the compatibility POV this should be safe, with
> ACLs compiled out, no tool would use them, and no harm done when the
> code is present but not used.
> 
> There were some efforts by embedded guys to make parts of kernel more
> configurable to allow removing subsystems to reduce the final image
> size. In this case I don't think it would make any noticeable
> difference, eg. the size of fs/btrfs/acl.o on release config is 1.6KiB,
> while the whole module is over 1.3MiB.

Actually, btrfs's LOC is about 20 times larger than erofs's, acl part's LOC
could be very small one in btrfs.

EROFS can be slimmed about 10% size if we disable XATTR/ACL config, which is
worth to keep that, at least for now.

Thanks,