linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks

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: <0f4f3e65-1d2d-e512-2a6f-d7d63effc479@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:52:19 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     ebiederm@...ssion.com, willy@...radead.org,
        linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
        ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org, bfields@...ldses.org,
        w@....eu, rostedt@...dmis.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory
 locks

On 20.08.21 15:57, Jeff Layton wrote:
> We've had CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING since 2015 and a lot of distros
> have disabled it. Warn the stragglers that still use "-o mand" that
> we'll be dropping support for that mount option.
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
> ---
>   fs/namespace.c | 8 ++++++++
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> index ab4174a3c802..ffab0bb1e649 100644
> --- a/fs/namespace.c
> +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> @@ -1716,8 +1716,16 @@ static inline bool may_mount(void)
>   }
>   
>   #ifdef	CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING
> +static bool warned_mand;
>   static inline bool may_mandlock(void)
>   {
> +	if (!warned_mand) {
> +		warned_mand = true;
> +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> +		pr_warn("WARNING: the mand mount option is being deprecated and\n");
> +		pr_warn("         will be removed in v5.15!\n");
> +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> +	}

Is there a reason not to use pr_warn_once() ?


-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb