On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 08:23:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 at 07:16, Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > (1) Since the ntfs3 driver is supposed to serve as a drop-in replacement > > for the legacy ntfs driver we should to it the same way we did it > > for ext3 and ext4 where ext4 registers itself also for the ext3 > > driver. In other words, we would register ntfs3 as ntfs3 filesystem > > type and as legacy ntfs filesystem type. > > I think that if just registering it under the same name solves the > immediate issue, that's the one we should just go for. I also tend to agree, but... > > To make it fully compatible > > we also need to make sure it's persistently mounted read-only. > > My reaction to that is "only if it turns out we really need to". > > It sounds unlikely that somebody has an old ntfs setup and then tries > to mount things rw which didn't use to work and things go sideways if > that then suddenly works. > > But "unlikely" isn't "impossible", of course - it's just that I'd > suggest we actually wait for that report to happen and ask what the > heck they were doing and why they were doing that... I think the "ntfs" alias must always be mounted read-only because you can currently have an fstab entry which does not specify "ro" and this mount would suddenly become writeable when updating to 6.9 (possibly by a non-privileged user, etc). We also need to do something about the ntfs3 driver spamming the logs about broken corrections also when mounted read-only even if it doesn't eat your filesystem then. And it seems write-support should be disabled in the driver by default until someone has tracked down why listing a directory can currently corrupt your filesystem. Johan
