linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ext4: Put inode

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: <ZEwJeMUM3bxTLx4q@mit.edu>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:59:20 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Wu Jianyue <wujianyue000@...il.com>
Cc:     adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Put inode_operations in inode.c

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 09:34:20PM +0800, Wu Jianyue wrote:
> inode_operations is more suitable to put in inode.c,
> instead of file.c, so moved to inode.c.

The inode operations structure for directories is in fs/ext4/namei.c;
the inode operations for symlinks is in fs/ext4/symlink.c.  Exactly
where the structure definition is somewhat arbitrary; should it be
where the majority of the functions are defined?  Should it be
associated with the file where operations for that inode type are
located?  Should it be in the file where the structure is used (which
is actually in two files; fs/ext4/namei.c and fs/ext4/inode.c)?

Moving it is just churn and makes things less consistent, so I don't
think it's worth it to take this patch, sorry.

      	   	       	    	 	- Ted