Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.35 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.35;
Date:   Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:03:17 +0900
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
To:     Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@kernel.org>
Cc:     Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@microsoft.com>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>, v9fs@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/29] 9p: move xattr-related structs to .rodata
Message-ID: <ZRfkVWyuNaapaOOO@codewreck.org>
References: <20230930050033.41174-1-wedsonaf@gmail.com>
 <20230930050033.41174-4-wedsonaf@gmail.com>
 <41368837.HejemxxR3G@silver>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41368837.HejemxxR3G@silver>
Precedence: bulk

Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Sat, Sep 30, 2023 at 10:12:25AM +0200:
> On Saturday, September 30, 2023 7:00:07 AM CEST Wedson Almeida Filho wrote:
> > From: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@microsoft.com>
> > 
> > This makes it harder for accidental or malicious changes to
> > v9fs_xattr_user_handler, v9fs_xattr_trusted_handler,
> > v9fs_xattr_security_handler, or v9fs_xattr_handlers at runtime.
> > 
> > Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>
> > Cc: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
> > Cc: Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>
> > Cc: v9fs@lists.linux.dev
> > Signed-off-by: Wedson Almeida Filho <walmeida@microsoft.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>

Looks good to me on principle as well (and it should blow up immediately
on testing in the unlikely case there's a problem...)

Eric, I don't think you have anything planned for this round?
There's another data race patch laying around that we didn't submit for
6.6, shall I take these two for now?

(Assuming this patch series is meant to be taken up by individual fs
maintainers independantly, it's never really clear with such large
swatches of patchs and we weren't in Cc of a cover letter if there was
any... In the future it'd help if either there's a clear cover letter
everyone is in Cc at (some would say keep everyone in cc of all
patches!), or just send these in a loop so they don't appear to be part
of a series and each maintainer deals with it as they see fit)

-- 
Dominique