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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 21:06:14 +0100 (CET)
From:   Richard Weinberger <>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <>
Cc:     Miquel Raynal <>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <>,
        Boris Brezillon <>,
        Ron Minnich <>, sven <>,
        linux-kernel <>,
        linux-mtd <>,
        fuse-devel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] MUSE: Userspace backed MTD v3


----- Urspr√ľngliche Mail -----
>> I do wonder if MUSE should go to drivers/mtd/ instead.   Long term
>> goal would be move CUSE to drivers/char and move the transport part of
>> fuse into net/fuse leaving only the actual filesystems (fuse and
>> virtiofs) under fs/.
>> But for now just moving the minimal interface needed for MUSE into a
>> separate header (<net/fuse.h>) would work, I guess.
>> Do you think that would make sense?
> Yes, I'm all for having MUSE in drivers/mtd/.
> I placed MUSE initially in fs/fuse/ because CUSE was already there and muse.c
> includes
> fuse_i.h. So tried to be as little invasive as possible.

I did a quick patch series which moves CUSE into drivers/char/

Does this more or less what you had in mind?
If so, I'd submit these patches, rebase MUSE on them and do a v4 soon.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists