linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Folio fixes for 5.18

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yk0rbm6n6801cEq9@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 5 Apr 2022 22:55:58 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     dsterba@...e.cz, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Folio fixes for 5.18

On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 03:22:09PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 02:08:48PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > Matthew, can you please always CC linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org for any
> > patches that touch code under fs/btrfs? I've only noticed your folio
> > updates in this pull request. Some of the changes are plain API switch,
> > that's fine but I want to know about that, some changes seem to slightly
> > modify logic that I'd really like to review and there are several missed
> > opportunities to fix coding style. Thanks.
> 
> I'm sorry, that's an unreasonable request.  There's ~50 filesystems
> that use address_space_operations and cc'ing individual filesystems
> on VFS-wide changes isn't feaasible.

FYI, for these kinds of global API changes I tend to add all the
mainling lists, but drop the multiple maintainers that would blow this
up even futher.  But even that lead to occasional complaints.