linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH V2 2/5] erofs: introduce fscache-based domain

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:   Tue, 13 Sep 2022 14:34:46 +0800
From:   JeffleXu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Jia Zhu <zhujia.zj@...edance.com>, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        yinxin.x@...edance.com, huyue2@...lpad.com
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH V2 2/5] erofs: introduce fscache-based
 domain



On 9/13/22 12:31 PM, Jia Zhu wrote:
> 
> 
> 在 2022/9/9 16:42, JeffleXu 写道:
>>>   int erofs_fscache_register_cookie(struct super_block *sb,
>>>                     struct erofs_fscache **fscache,
>>>                     char *name, bool need_inode)
>>> @@ -495,7 +581,8 @@ int erofs_fscache_register_fs(struct super_block
>>> *sb)
>>>       char *name;
>>>       int ret = 0;
>>>   -    name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s", sbi->opt.fsid);
>>> +    name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "erofs,%s",
>>> +            sbi->domain ? sbi->domain->domain_id : sbi->opt.fsid);
>>
>> Do we also need to encode the cookie name in the "<domain_id>,<fsid>"
>> format? This will affect the path of the cache files.
>>
> I think even though the cookies have the same name, they belong to
> different volumes(path). Cookies do not affect each other.
> Are there other benefits to doing so?

Okay. The current implementation is correct. Please ignore the noise.


-- 
Thanks,
Jingbo