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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:44:28 -0500 From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> Subject: Re: Some interesting input from a flash manufacturer >>>>> "Ted" == Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu> writes: Ted> As far as the /sys/block/XXX/queue/* framework, certainly. It's Ted> not clear, however, whether or not we should use entirely new Ted> parameters, or try to reuse the existing parameters. For example, Ted> would it be better to use optimal_io_size for the flash page size, Ted> or the erase block size? If we were to use the existing fields we'd probably set min_io to the flash page size and optimal_io to the erase block size. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists