linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] fs: hide names_cachep behind runtime access machinery

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: <CAHk-=wj5o+BPgrUNase4tOuzbBMmiqyiYO9apO9Ou-M_M1-tKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 09:15:49 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, jack@...e.cz, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, pfalcato@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] fs: hide names_cachep behind runtime access machinery

On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 at 03:52, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Should someone(tm) make this work for modules I'm not going to protest.

Btw, that's a good point. When I did this all originally, I explicitly
did *not* want to make it work for modules, but I do note that it can
be used for modules very easily by mistake.

> Vast majority of actual usage is coming from core kernel, which *is*
> getting the new treatment and I don't think the ifdef is particularly
> nasty.

I suspect we should make that #ifdef be an integral part of the
runtime const headers. Because right now it's really much too easy to
get it wrong, and I wonder if we already do.

              Linus