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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:12:43 -0800 From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@...pl>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/filemap: add static for function __add_to_page_cache_locked On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:32 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 06:05:52PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 04:51:48PM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 03:08:26PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 03:46:28PM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > > > At this point of release cycle we should probably go with revert, > > > > > but I think the main problem is that BPF and ERROR_INJECTION use > > > > > function that is not intended to be used externally. For external users > > > > > add_to_page_cache_lru() and add_to_page_cache_locked() are exported > > > > > and I think those should be used (see the patch below). > > > > > > > > FWIW, I intend to do some consolidation/renaming in this area. I > > > > trust that will not be a problem? > > > > > > If it does not break anything, it will be not a problem ;-) > > > > > > It's possible that __add_to_page_cache_locked() can be a global symbol > > > with add_to_page_cache_lru() + add_to_page_cache_locked() being just > > > static/inline wrappers around it. > > > > So what happens to BTF if we change this area entirely? Your IDs > > sound like some kind of ABI to me, which is extremely scary. > > Is BTF becoming the new tracepoint? That is, random additions of things like: > > BTF_ID(func,__add_to_page_cache_locked) > > Like was done in commit 1e6c62a882155 ("bpf: Introduce sleepable BPF > programs") without any notification to the maintainers of the > __add_to_page_cache_locked code, will suddenly become an API? huh? what api/abi you're talking about?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists