Re: [syzbot] [hfs?] WARNING in hfs_write_inode
- To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>
- Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, Viacheslav Dubeyko <slava@dubeyko.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, syzbot <syzbot+7bb7cd3595533513a9e7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, ZhangPeng <zhangpeng362@huawei.com>, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, debian-ports <debian-ports@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: [syzbot] [hfs?] WARNING in hfs_write_inode
- From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 14:27:50 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] 868611d7f222a19127783cc8d5f2af2e42ee24e4.camel@kernel.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] ZLl2Fq35Ya0cNbIm@casper.infradead.org>
- References: <5f45bb9a-5e00-48dd-82b0-46b19b1b98a3@app.fastmail.com> <CAHk-=wi8XyAUF9_z6-oa4Ava6PVZeE-=TVNcFK1puQHpOtqLLw@mail.gmail.com> <ab7a9477-ddc7-430f-b4ee-c67251e879b0@app.fastmail.com> <2575F983-D170-4B79-A6BA-912D4ED2CC73@dubeyko.com> <46F233BB-E587-4F2B-AA62-898EB46C9DCE@dubeyko.com> <Y7bw7X1Y5KtmPF5s@casper.infradead.org> <50D6A66B-D994-48F4-9EBA-360E57A37BBE@dubeyko.com> <CACT4Y+aJb4u+KPAF7629YDb2tB2geZrQm5sFR3M+r2P1rgicwQ@mail.gmail.com> <ZLlvII/jMPTT32ef@casper.infradead.org> <[🔎] 2d0bd58fb757e7771d13f82050a546ec5f7be8de.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> <[🔎] ZLl2Fq35Ya0cNbIm@casper.infradead.org>
On Thu, 2023-07-20 at 18:59 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 07:50:47PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > > Then we should delete the HFS/HFS+ filesystems. They're orphaned in
> > > MAINTAINERS and if distros are going to do such a damnfool thing,
> > > then we must stop them.
> >
> > Both HFS and HFS+ work perfectly fine. And if distributions or users are so
> > sensitive about security, it's up to them to blacklist individual features
> > in the kernel.
> >
> > Both HFS and HFS+ have been the default filesystem on MacOS for 30 years
> > and I don't think it's justified to introduce such a hard compatibility
> > breakage just because some people are worried about theoretical evil
> > maid attacks.
> >
> > HFS/HFS+ mandatory if you want to boot Linux on a classic Mac or PowerMac
> > and I don't think it's okay to break all these systems running Linux.
>
> If they're so popular, then it should be no trouble to find somebody
> to volunteer to maintain those filesystems. Except they've been
> marked as orphaned since 2011 and effectively were orphaned several
> years before that (the last contribution I see from Roman Zippel is
> in 2008, and his last contribution to hfs was in 2006).
I suspect that this is one of those catch-22 situations: distros are
going to enable every feature under the sun. That doesn't mean that
anyone is actually _using_ them these days.
Is "staging" still a thing? Maybe we should move these drivers into the
staging directory and pick a release where we'll sunset it, and then see
who comes out of the woodwork?
Cheers,
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Reply to: