linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] proc,fcntl: introduce F_SET

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: <CAGbU3_nPuWyrhOVbHGk7EXb+fVAOR1sC08Fu-1sOdbOsmQkE_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jul 2020 23:25:38 -0700
From:   Pascal Bouchareine <kalou@....net>
To:     Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-api@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] proc,fcntl: introduce F_SET_DESCRIPTION

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 6:39 PM Pascal Bouchareine <kalou@....net> wrote:
> > struct file is nicely aligned to 256 bytes on distro configs.
> > Will this break everything?
> >
> >         $ cat /sys/kernel/slab/filp/object_size
>
> Indeed on the config I'm using here this jumped to 264 bytes
>
> Would it be better to move this to the inode struct? I don't know the
> implications of this - any other option?

Well it doesn't actually make much sense to share that at that level

However the above 264 is building from 5.4 without f_sb_err, so I
think master already passed the 256 bytes too ?