linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 4/4] fs: unicode: Add utf8 module and a unicode layer

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]

Date:   Wed, 02 Jun 2021 20:07:07 -0400
From:   Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>
To:     Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@...labora.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
        jaegeuk@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org, ebiggers@...gle.com,
        drosen@...gle.com, ebiggers@...nel.org, yuchao0@...wei.com,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/4] fs: unicode: Add utf8 module and a unicode layer

Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@...labora.com> writes:

> On 11/05/21 10:05 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 02:17:00AM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote:
>>> Theodore / Christoph, since we haven't come up with any final decision with
>>> this discussion, how do you think we should proceed on this?
>> I think loading it as a firmware-like table is much preferable to
>> a module with all the static call magic papering over that it really is
>> just one specific table.
>
>
> Christoph, I get you point here but request_firmware API requires a
> device pointer and I don't
> see anywhere it being NULL so I am not sure if we are going in the right
> way by loading the data as firmware like table.

I wasn't going to really oppose it from being a firmware but this
detail, if required, makes the whole firmware idea more awkward.  If the
whole reason to make it a firmware is to avoid the module boilerplate,
this is just different boilerplate.  Once again, I don't know about
precedent of kernel data as a module, and there is the problem with
Makefile rules to install this stuff, that I mentioned.

We know we can get rid of the static call stuff already, since we likely
won't support more encodings anyway, so that would simplify a lot the
module specific code.

-- 
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi