linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] arch/*: config: Remove ReiserFS from defconfig

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]

Message-ID: <CAMuHMdWQwDzAnbQvBvt3iuL=UPxtufU=TgQM=oKjDvmgmrcy3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 11:30:23 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Peter Lafreniere <peter@...jl.ca>
Cc:     anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru,
        jack@...e.cz, johannes@...solutions.net,
        linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        richard.henderson@...aro.org, richard@....at,
        segher@...nel.crashing.org, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] arch/*: config: Remove ReiserFS from defconfig

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 6:16 PM Peter Lafreniere <peter@...jl.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 12:02, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 5:58 PM Peter Lafreniere peter@...jl.ca wrote:
> > > 2) Stops building an obsolete and largely-unused filesystem unnecessarily.
> > > Some hobbyist targets like m68k and alpha may prefer to keep all filesystems
> > > available until total removal, but others like arm and UML have no need for
> > > ReiserFS to be built unless specifically configured.
> >
> >
> > As UML is used a lot for testing, isn't it actually counter-productive
> > to remove ReiserFS from the UML defconfig? The less testing it
> > receives, the higher the chance of introducing regressions.
>
> UML is used for testing, but in my view that makes the inclusion of
> ReiserFS in its defconfig even worse. Users of UML are trying to test a

Why?
Because you want to avoid doing any testing at all on deprecated features?

> particular function, and so tend to use ext[2-4], as those are included in
> the defconfig and are well tested and stable. So there is no extra testing
> being done on ReiserFS due to its inclusion in the defconfig.

I'd expect global file system testers to use something along the line of:

    for i in $(grep -v nodev /proc/filesystems ); do
        echo --- Testing $i ---
        dd if=/dev/zero of=testimage bs=1M count=1 seek=10000
        mkfs.$i testimage
        mount testimage /mnt -t $i
        [run xfstests on testimage]
        rm -f testimage
    done

> Keeping UML's defconfig as slim as possible improves build times, which is
> particularly important for kernel testing and development.

Good luck testing all functionality using a "slim" kernel ;-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds