From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC6DDC43381 for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71D3C204FD for ; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:37:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="wQzu4nvx" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390094AbfBOHhe (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 02:37:34 -0500 Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com ([141.146.126.79]:59186 "EHLO aserp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728823AbfBOHhe (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 02:37:34 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1F7T8Nt183772; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:36:54 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=ouO38S8+Vs+emb1gu7YBj/S8iIHWboAqd2m7hVIdC90=; b=wQzu4nvxIFCHsITWczmue1s9XNcGeB6ZdJTBtp+Nc0LZbMMe2aNm0M1f5ObrzTGUAITw x0Mt82xZ97IQTntVn7O79SjO7AsOsOuNgJMchDm5Zf/mCpfNwEWLBwm/5Cbc8ll7Ekrc 8NTGfYFP86P69xYVIzTgS0UTYd2H8Z3w1tMeIv+bzAgcI5w++65Is+Y68IJ1T18KIwJs 8IDGK5nhcf4Flc4gqCEF0W+DY3JedAUFOD+WKsVWUwGqwc6HY17SVAGJxldQ92PQAWQB POjC6Nj9D3bNLExmMUlpkdb3BRtoLQOrQ7kb4QmapMnAWd2b22jg51KixDqS/FC8vU2b Zw== Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2qhre5v7b4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:36:54 +0000 Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1F7asZj026483 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:36:54 GMT Received: from abhmp0001.oracle.com (abhmp0001.oracle.com [141.146.116.7]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x1F7arPE020103; Fri, 15 Feb 2019 07:36:54 GMT Received: from kadam (/197.157.0.55) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:36:53 -0800 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 10:36:44 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Chao Yu Cc: Chao Yu , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, LKML , weidu.du@huawei.com, Miao Xie Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: erofs: complete POSIX ACL support Message-ID: <20190215073644.GD2326@kadam> 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> <20190128183053.GK1795@kadam> <16373e83-2496-3bf5-7b16-72f3454d294d@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9167 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=825 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1902150056 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:10:34AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Any suggestion? > I won't NAK whatever you decide. But my opinion is that you should just use normal kernel memory allocators even though it means you have to use two different fault injection frameworks. Over time it would be good to improve and expand the standard kernel error injection frameworks to cover more types. regards, dan carpenter