[PATCH] erofs: move erofs out of staging

Gao Xiang hsiangkao at aol.com
Sun Aug 18 16:33:25 UTC 2019

Hi Hch,

On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:22:01AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 09:16:38AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > Ted's observation was about maliciously-crafted filesystems, though, so
> > integrity-only features such as metadata checksums are irrelevant.  Also the
> > filesystem version is irrelevant; anything accepted by the kernel code (even if
> I think allowing users to mount file systems (any of ours) without
> privilege is a rather bad idea.  But that doesn't mean we should not be
> as robust as we can.  Optionally disabling support for legacy formats
> at compile and/or runtime is something we should actively look into as
> well.
> > it's legacy/deprecated) is open attack surface.
> > 
> > I personally consider it *mandatory* that we deal with this stuff.  But I can
> > understand that we don't do a good job at it, so we shouldn't hold a new
> > filesystem to an unfairly high standard relative to other filesystems...
> I very much disagree.  We can't really force anyone to fix up old file
> systems.  But we can very much hold new ones to (slightly) higher
> standards.  Thats the only way to get the average quality up.  Some as
> for things like code style - we can't magically fix up all old stuff,
> but we can and usually do hold new code to higher standards.  (Often not
> to standards as high as I'd personally prefer, btw).

I personally don't want to discuss about other fses here...

I think XFS developers do great jobs all the time and
EROFS is a simple file system compared with these
generic file systems.

I can promise you that our team will fix bug reports in time, and
I personally think the current EROFS code is not as bad as a bullsh**t...

If you have some time, I'm very happy if you can take some of
your precious time on our work...

Gao Xiang

More information about the devel mailing list