linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] filesystem visibililty ioctls

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3yuohpx2vcnl5kjs54h5med3q2525xzkxvzxqqctrgadptytww@36kyayedfnbs>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 18:24:25 -0500
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] filesystem visibililty ioctls

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 05:47:40PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 03:26:55PM -0500, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > You've still got the ext4 version, we're not taking that away. But I
> > don't think other filesystems will want to deal with the hassle of
> > changing UUIDs at runtime, since that's effectively used for API access
> > via sysfs and debugfs.
> 
> Thanks. I misunderstood the log.  I didn't realize this was just about
> not hoisting the ioctl to the VFS level, and dropping the generic uuid
> set.
> 
> I'm not convinced that we should be using the UUID for kernel API
> access, if for no other reason that not all file systems have UUID's.
> Sure, modern file systems have UUID's, and individual file systems
> might have to have specific features that don't play well with UUID's
> changing while the file system is mounted.  But I'm hoping that we
> don't add any new interfaces that rely on using the UUID for API
> access at the VFS layer.  After all, ext2 (not just ext3 and ext4) has
> supported changing the UUID while the file system has been mounted for
> *decades*.

*nod*

The intention isn't for every filesystem to be using the UUID for API
access - there's no reason to for single device filesystems, after all.

The intent is rather - for filesystems that _do_ need the UUID as a
stable identifier, let's try to standardize how's it's exposed and
used...