linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] btrfs: zstd: Switch to the zstd-1.4.6 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]

Message-ID: <20200917100458.GA28031@infradead.org>
Date:   Thu, 17 Sep 2020 11:04:58 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Cc:     Nick Terrell <terrelln@...com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
        Nick Terrell <nickrterrell@...il.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "squashfs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <squashfs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>, Petr Malat <oss@...at.biz>,
        Johannes Weiner <jweiner@...com>,
        Niket Agarwal <niketa@...com>, Yann Collet <cyan@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] btrfs: zstd: Switch to the zstd-1.4.6 API

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:35:51PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > One possibility is to have a kernel wrapper on top of the zstd API to
> > make it
> > more ergonomic. I personally don???t really see the value in it, since
> > it adds
> > another layer of indirection between zstd and the caller, but it
> > could be done.
> 
> Zstd would not be the first part of the kernel to
> come from somewhere else, and have wrappers when
> it gets integrated into the kernel. There certainly
> is precedence there.
> 
> It would be interesting to know what Christoph's
> preference is.

Yes, I think kernel wrappers would be a pretty sensible step forward.
That also avoid the need to do strange upgrades to a new version,
and instead we can just change APIs on a as-needed basis.