linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/9] block: add llseek(SEEK_HOLE/SEEK

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: <20240405070258.GC4176@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 09:02:58 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
	David Teigland <teigland@...hat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Joe Thornber <ejt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/9] block: add llseek(SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA) support

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 08:31:09AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> As well as my question on whether the community would be open to
> introducing new SEEK_* constants to allow orthogonality between
> searching for zeroes (known to read as zero, whether or not it was
> allocated) vs. sparseness (known to be unallocated, whether or not it
> reads as zero), where the existing SEEK_HOLE seeks for both properties
> at once.

That seems like quite an effort.  Is is worth it?