From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dan.carpenter@oracle.com (Dan Carpenter) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 21:30:53 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: erofs: complete POSIX ACL support In-Reply-To: <1eed1e6b-f95e-aa8e-c3e7-e9870401ee23@kernel.org> References: <20190125161007.4447-1-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> <20190125161007.4447-2-gaoxiang25@huawei.com> <94daa491-40c8-4a09-a0b5-55a7e92dc3fc@huawei.com> <20190128133302.GI1795@kadam> <1eed1e6b-f95e-aa8e-c3e7-e9870401ee23@kernel.org> Message-ID: <20190128183053.GK1795@kadam> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019@12:41:55AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Dan and Xiang, > > On 2019-1-28 21:48, Gao Xiang wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > > > On 2019/1/28 21:33, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >> Hopefully, regular kmalloc() is enough. > >> > >> Do really need the erofs_kmalloc() function? Regular kmalloc() has > >> fault injection already. Have you tried to use it? > > Yes, I think we'd better to use erofs_kmalloc(). :) > > Actually, fault injection in erofs_kmalloc only affect erofs module, we can > expect that the range of fault can be limited in erofs code, rather than whole > kernel, so the test point can be aimed at more accurately. > Are you serious? The standard fault injection doesn't do that??? Please fix it instead of creating a duplicate better implementation which only your filesystem can use. I would have thought that obviously any fault injection framework could at least be configured to test specific code... regards, dan carpenter