linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/11] ntfsplus: ntfs filesystem remake

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <45YJ4T.CS9RVQCDTG7F1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 00:24:40 +0300
From: Lassebq <lassebq.mine@...il.com>
To: linkinjeon@...nel.org
Cc: amir73il@...il.com, brauner@...nel.org, cheol.lee@....com,
	djwong@...nel.org, dsterba@...e.com, ebiggers@...nel.org, gunho.lee@....com,
	hch@...radead.org, hch@....de, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, jack@...e.cz,
	jay.sim@....com, josef@...icpanda.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neil@...wn.name, pali@...nel.org,
	rgoldwyn@...e.com, sandeen@...deen.net, tytso@....edu,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, willy@...radead.org, xiang@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] ntfsplus: ntfs filesystem remake

Hello

I wanted to apply these patches on top of my kernel build, but I 
noticed that not every diff is included in the thread. And I think some 
code in patches appears to be a out of date or target an older kernel? 
Like there is usage of inode_generic_drop instead of generic_drop_inode.

Is there a reason for that? I'm new to kernel mailing lists so I'm not 
exactly sure why that's the case or how it works.

Appreciate if you could clear things up for a newbie like me.

Ivan