linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] android: ram_console: split out persistent ram

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:33:06 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
Cc:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] android: ram_console: split out persistent ram

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 07:06:42PM -0800, Colin Cross wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 05:34:32PM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> >> From: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>
> >>
> >> Split ram_console into two halves.
> >>
> >> persistent_ram is a set of apis that handle a block of memory
> >> that does not get erased across a reboot.  It provides functions
> >> to fill it as a single buffer or a ring buffer, and to extract
> >> the old data after a reboot.  It handles ecc on the data to
> >> correct bit errors introduced during reboot.
> >
> > That's a nice idea, but why are you rolling your own interface here and
> > not using the built-in one that the kernel already provides?  Is there
> > something lacking with what we have today that requires you to create
> > something different?  If so, why not just modify the existing interface
> > to make it work for you, that way the tools already created will work
> > automatically, and you will not have problems later ripping this out and
> > porting it to the in-kernel api.
> 
> What interface are you referring to, pstore?

Yes.

> As I explained in the email John quoted to you,

Wait, what email?  Did I miss a response here?  Have a message-id: I can
search for?

> pstore would be a client of this, and ramconsole could be moved on top
> of pstore.

Ok, as long as that is the end goal, that's fine, it was not obvious
that this was the case at all, hence my confusion.

> This patch is just a refactoring that splits ramconsole and the
> persistent storage apart without significantly changing the api
> between them, and only makes it easier to insert pstore between them.

That's good to hear, I'll go queue them up then, thanks for clearing
this up.

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/