linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the vfs tree

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: <20260115145754.GZ3634291@ZenIV>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:57:54 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the vfs tree

On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 09:28:34AM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:

> 1) Split it (and similar cases) into: 
> 
> 	"filename_link() and filename_renameat2()" 
> 
>    which would give sphinx automarkup the opportunity to create
>    cross references
> 
>    (my preference)

The final state right now is (admittedly sloppy)

  do_{mkdir,mknod,link,symlink,renameat2,rmdir,unlink}() are gone; filename_...()
  counterparts replace those.  The difference is that the former used to consume
  filename references; the latter do not.

Sure, the entire note can be split in 7 notes differing only in the names
of removed function and its replacement, but it feels wrong ;-/