From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] fs: common implementation of file type Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 17:41:15 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxhGGZv52Ch2NjxOFt35KsFpja=jCk-x8jBNZcxRe9OoYA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20181024130206.GC11606@thunk.org> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:02 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 09:19:53PM +0100, Phillip Potter wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/file_type.h b/include/linux/file_type.h > > Shouldn't this be in include/uapi/linux/fs_types.h? > IDGI. Why do we want this file in uapi? The DT_ constants are already defined by glibc dirent.h and the FT_ constants and macros we don't want to expose to uapi at all. Right? Maybe all we need is a comment above DT_ constants that those are defined by POSIX and in glibc dirent.h? > One of things which must be made crystal clear is these definitions > MUST NOT ever change. It would break the Userspace ABI, and would > break file systems on-disk format. > > It might also be useful to be clear *why* we are making this change in > the first place. Code refactorization is good from a code maintenance > perspective (either to fix bugs, although this code is pretty > trivial), Very trivial code that has had an out of bounds access bug for two decades and bug was duplicated to 7 filesystems. IMO, fixing the bug in one place instead of 7 is a good enough reason for re-factoring. Thanks, Amir.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-24 14:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-10-23 20:19 Phillip Potter 2018-10-24 6:16 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-10-24 8:21 ` Phillip Potter 2018-10-24 9:20 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-10-24 9:31 ` Phillip Potter 2018-10-24 9:44 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-10-24 9:56 ` Phillip Potter 2018-10-24 10:06 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-10-24 12:37 ` Al Viro 2018-10-24 13:02 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2018-10-24 14:41 ` Amir Goldstein [this message] 2018-10-25 11:20 ` Jan Kara
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='CAOQ4uxhGGZv52Ch2NjxOFt35KsFpja=jCk-x8jBNZcxRe9OoYA@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=amir73il@gmail.com \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=phil@philpotter.co.uk \ --cc=tytso@mit.edu \ --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \ --subject='Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] fs: common implementation of file type' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).