linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 for-6.8/block 01/18] block: add some bdev apis

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]

Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 05:14:24 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
	roger.pau@...rix.com, colyli@...e.de, kent.overstreet@...il.com,
	joern@...ybastard.org, miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, richard@....at,
	vigneshr@...com, sth@...ux.ibm.com, hoeppner@...ux.ibm.com,
	hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
	jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, clm@...com,
	josef@...icpanda.com, dsterba@...e.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	brauner@...nel.org, nico@...xnic.net, xiang@...nel.org,
	chao@...nel.org, tytso@....edu, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca,
	agruenba@...hat.com, jack@...e.com, konishi.ryusuke@...il.com,
	willy@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	p.raghav@...sung.com, hare@...e.de, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, gfs2@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org, yukuai3@...wei.com,
	yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 for-6.8/block 01/18] block: add some bdev apis

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 05:52:17PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > +void bdev_associated_mapping(struct block_device *bdev,
> > +			     struct address_space *mapping)
> > +{
> > +	mapping->host = bdev->bd_inode;
> > +}
> 
> Here I'm not sure - is the helper really a win? It seems a bit obscure to
> me. This initialization of another mapping for a bdev looks really special.

If we want to hide bd_inode we'll something like this helper even if
I don't particularly like it either.

But it might be a good idea to move out of this series and into the
follow on removing bd_inode, as it's rather pointless without that
context.