linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] xfs: fixes for 5.18-rc5

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220428213157.GT1098723@dread.disaster.area>
Date:   Fri, 29 Apr 2022 07:31:57 +1000
From:   Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] xfs: fixes for 5.18-rc5

On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 09:46:14AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 11:19 PM Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's all minor stuff;  a 5.18 build regession fix, a deadlock fix
> > and an update to remove redundant fields from the XFS entry in the
> > MAINTAINERS file.
> 
> Done.

Thanks!

> I had to look twice at that patch going "why does it complain about
> the xfs flags thing" until I realized it was due to XBF_UNMAPPED being
> (1 <<31) and the compiler then seeing explicit negative values being
> assigned.
> 
> We have a lot of "int flags" in various places, very much not just
> xfs, and yeah, we should probably try to clean them up.

Yup, I've already got a bunch of similar cleanup patches for
XFS ready for the next merge window.

> But 99% of the time it's just not worth the noise.

Mostly I agree, but in coverting another dozen+ sets of flags the
biggest benefit I've seen comes from the bit flag definitions all
having a consistent format across the code base.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com