linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iomap: Fix conflicting values of iomap flags

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: <20250328104846.GB19460@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 11:48:46 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
Cc: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>,
	linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, brauner@...nel.org,
	djwong@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iomap: Fix conflicting values of iomap flags

On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 10:04:14PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> Just my opinion - and others will prob disagree - but I think that the 
> reason this was missed (my fault, though) was because we have separate 
> grouping of flags within the same struct member. Maybe having separate 
> flags altogether would help avoid this.

Yes.  But going down to less than 16 bit fields also has downsides, as
does growing the struture.