From: Wedson Almeida Filho
This makes it harder for accidental or malicious changes to
f2fs_xattr_handlers or f2fs_xattr_handler_map at runtime.
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim
Cc: Chao Yu
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Signed-off-by: Wedson Almeida Filho
---
fs/f2fs/xattr.c | 4 ++--
fs/f2fs/xa
On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 20:50, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> OTOH, it is perfectly fine if the vfs wants to stop providing sub 100ns
> services to filesystems. It's just going to be the fs problem and the
> preserved pre-historic/fine-grained time on existing files would only
> need to be provided in
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=210795
Tomas Thiemel (thie...@centrum.cz) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Res
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=210797
Tomas Thiemel (thie...@centrum.cz) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Res
On Fri, 2023-09-29 at 11:44 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > It is a lot of churn though.
>
> I think that i_{a,c,m}time shouldn't be accessed directly by
> filesystems same as no filesystem should really access i_{g,u}id which
> we also provide i_{g,u}id_{read,write}() accessors for. The mode
> It is a lot of churn though.
I think that i_{a,c,m}time shouldn't be accessed directly by
filesystems same as no filesystem should really access i_{g,u}id which
we also provide i_{g,u}id_{read,write}() accessors for. The mode is
another example where really most often should use helpers because
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 10:41:34AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 04:06, Jeff Layton wrote:
> >
> > Move i_blocks up above the i_lock, which moves the new 4 byte hole to
> > just after the timestamps, without changing the size of the structure.
>
> I'm sure others have men
