linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Rename "cifs" module to "smbfs"

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: <20220802192806.6ryronlqvus2ua26@cyberdelia>
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 16:28:06 -0300
From:   Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@...e.de>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, smfrench@...il.com, pc@....nz,
        ronniesahlberg@...il.com, nspmangalore@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        tom@...pey.com, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
        pshilovsky@...ba.org, jlayton@...nel.org, rpenny@...ba.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Rename "cifs" module to "smbfs"

On 08/02, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 04:00:43PM -0300, Enzo Matsumiya wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As part of the ongoing effort to remove the "cifs" nomenclature from the
>> Linux SMB client, I'm proposing the rename of the module to "smbfs".
>>
>> As it's widely known, CIFS is associated to SMB1.0, which, in turn, is
>> associated with the security issues it presented in the past. Using
>> "SMBFS" makes clear what's the protocol in use for outsiders, but also
>> unties it from any particular protocol version. It also fits in the
>> already existing "fs/smbfs_common" and "fs/ksmbd" naming scheme.
>>
>> This short patch series only changes directory names and includes/ifdefs in
>> headers and source code, and updates docs to reflect the rename. Other
>> than that, no source code/functionality is modified (WIP though).
>
>Why did you not reply to Jeff Layton's concern before posting a v2?

Hm, I was pretty sure I did. Sorry about that, I got confused on how my
mail client organized the replies to the initial thread.

Replying to Jeff right now.