linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs

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:   Wed, 12 Jul 2023 12:48:31 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
        djwong@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com, sandeen@...hat.com,
        willy@...radead.org, josef@...icpanda.com, tytso@....edu,
        bfoster@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com,
        brauner@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dhowells@...hat.com, snitzer@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] bcachefs

On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 10:54:59PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
>  - Prereq patch series has been pruned down a bit more; also Mike
>    Snitzer suggested putting those patches in their own branch:
> 
>    https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs.git/log/?h=bcachefs-prereqs
> 
>    "iov_iter: copy_folio_from_iter_atomic()" was dropped and replaced
>    with willy's "iov_iter: Handle compound highmem pages in
>    copy_page_from_iter_atomic()"; he said he'd try to send this for -rc4
>    since it's technically a bug fix; in the meantime, it'll be getting
>    more testing from my users.
> 
>    The two lockdep patches have been dropped for now; the
>    bcachefs-for-upstream branch is switched back to
>    lockdep_set_novalidate_class() for btree node locks. 
> 
>    six locks, mean and variance have been moved into fs/bcachefs/ for
>    now; this means there's a new prereq patch to export
>    osq_(lock|unlock)
> 
>    The remaining prereq patches are pretty trivial, with the exception
>    of "block: Don't block on s_umount from __invalidate_super()". I
>    would like to get a reviewed-by for that patch, and it wouldn't hurt
>    for others.
> 
>    previously posting:
>    https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bcachefs/20230509165657.1735798-1-kent.overstreet@linux.dev/T/#m34397a4d39f5988cc0b635e29f70a6170927746f

Can you send these prereqs out again, with maintainers CCed
appropriately? (I think some feedback from the prior revision needs to
be addressed first, though. For example, __flatten already exists, etc.)

-- 
Kees Cook