Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] hash: introduce unsafe_hash_algo(), drop unsafe_ variants

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 02:14:29PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:

> (This series is rebased on 'master', which is 14650065b7
> (RelNotes/2.48.0: fix typos etc., 2025-01-07) at the time of writing).
> 
> The bulk of this series is unchanged since last time, but a new seventh
> patch that further hardens the hashfile_checkpoint callers on top of
> Patrick's recent series[1].

I think that new patch is a definite improvement, though I left some
comments there.

The changes in patch 1 look fine to me (I still think a generic
"test-tool hash" would make more sense, but I'm OK punting on that for
now).

I didn't see any response to the review in round 1 about the pointer
dangers in patch 3. What do you think of using a separate
git_hash_algo_fns struct, with the one-time conversion I showed in the
subthread of:

  https://lore.kernel.org/git/20241121093731.GD602681@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

?

-Peff




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux