Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Valdis Kl=?utf-8?Q?=c4=93?=tnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/staging/exfat - by default, prohibit mount of fat/vfat
In-Reply-To: <20190830164503.GA12978@infradead.org>
References: <245727.1567183359@turing-police>
 <20190830164503.GA12978@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1567212516_4251P";
         micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date:   Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:48:36 -0400
Message-ID: <267691.1567212516@turing-police>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

--==_Exmh_1567212516_4251P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 09:45:03 -0700, Christoph Hellwig said:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 12:42:39PM -0400, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
> > Concerns have been raised about the exfat driver accidentally mounting
> > fat/vfat file systems.  Add an extra configure option to help prevent that.
>
> Just remove that code.  This is exactly what I fear about this staging
> crap, all kinds of half-a***ed patches instead of trying to get anything

Explain how it's half-a**ed.  You worry about accidental mounting, meanwhile
down in the embedded space there are memory-constrained machines that
don't want separate vfat and exfat drivers sitting around in memory. If you
have a better patch that addresses both concerns, feel free to submit it.

> done.  Given that you signed up as the maintainer for this what is your
> plan forward on it?  What development did you on the code and what are
> your next steps?

Well, the *original* plan was to get it into the tree someplace so it can get
review and updates from others.  Given the amount of press the Microsoft
announcement had, we were *hoping* there would be some momentum and
people actually looking at the code and feeding me patches. I've gotten a
half dozen already today....

Although if you prefer, it can just sit out-of-tree until I've got a perfect driver
without input or review from anybody.  But I can't think of *any* instance where
that model has actually worked.

--==_Exmh_1567212516_4251P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Exmh version 2.9.0 11/07/2018
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=uM87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--==_Exmh_1567212516_4251P--