linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] erofs: decouple basic mount options from fs

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:   Thu, 7 Oct 2021 14:29:16 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Liu Bo <bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peng Tao <tao.peng@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Yan Song <imeoer@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Changwei Ge <chge@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Liu Jiang <gerry@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] erofs: decouple basic mount options from
 fs_context

Hi Bo,

On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 02:10:48PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 03:44:52AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > Previously, EROFS mount options are all in the basic types, so
> > erofs_fs_context can be directly copied with assignment. However,
> > when the multiple device feature is introduced, it's hard to handle
> > multiple device information like the other basic mount options.
> > 
> > There is no need to allocate the whole sb info in advance, instead,
> > let's separate the basic mount options from fs_context, thus
> > multiple device information can be handled gracefully then.
> 
> This is a bit confusing, IIRC, currently erofs does not allocate the whole
> sb info in advance, does it?

No, it doesn't. I just mentioned there are 2 ways to pass fs private
contexts to fs_context:
 1) allocate sbi in advance by using fc->s_fs_info;
 2) allocate/pass a fs private fs_context by using fc->fs_private;

erofs uses the second way.... Actually I'm fine with getting rid of
such expression to avoid confusion for the next version...

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> thanks,
> liubo