linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] fscache: Replace and remove old I/O API

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:   Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:17:59 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
        Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
        Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
        "open list:NFS, SUNRPC, AND..." <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-cachefs@...hat.com, Dave Wysochanski <dwysocha@...hat.com>,
        Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@...il.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] fscache: Replace and remove old I/O API

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:55 AM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> This means bisection is of limited value and why I'm looking at a 'flag day'.

So I'm kind of resigned to that by now, I just wanted to again clarify
that the rest of my comments are about "if we have to deal with a flag
dat anyway, then make it as simple and straightforward as possible,
rather than adding extra steps that are only noise".

> [ Snip explanation of netfslib ]
> This particular patchset is intended to enable removal of the old I/O routines
> by changing nfs and cifs to use a "fallback" method to use the new kiocb-using
> API and thus allow me to get on with the rest of it.

Ok, at least that explains that part.

But:

> However, if you would rather I just removed all of fscache and (most of[*])
> cachefiles, that I can do.

I assume and think that if you just do that part first, then the
"convert to netfslib" of afs and ceph at that later stage will mean
that the fallback code will never be needed?

So I would much prefer that streamlined model over one that adds that
temporary intermediate stage only for it to be deleted.

             Linus