linux-kernel - Re: Asynchronous scsi scanning

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]

Message-ID: <20070516025121.GK10562@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2007 20:51:21 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
Cc:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
	James Bottomley <james.bottomley@...eleye.com>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kernel-packagers@...r.kernel.org,
	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
Subject: Re: Asynchronous scsi scanning

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 04:57:52AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> [ I appreciate you forked the thread and gave it a better subject name,
> it would be better still if you could maintain the original CC list, 
> thanks. ]

I removed the people I didn't think needed to be on the Cc list any more,
since I was changing the direction of the thread.

> On 5/15/07, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx> wrote:
> >> >It's easy to suggest a sysfs attribute.  What you've failed to do is
> >> >suggest the pathname of the sysfs attribute,
> 
> /sys/module/scsi_mod/parameters/wait_for_async_scans (?)
> Doesn't really matter, but perhaps who created the sysfs namespace
> for scsi in /sys/module/scsi_mod/... could be the best person to suggest.

No, it does matter.  Your suggestion doesn't work, because
/sys/module/scsi_mod/parameters/ belongs to the module code.  To create
a new attribute there, you use the module_param() code -- and there's
no way to have code called when your parameter is changed.

> >Why?  You're not forced to load the module.  In what way does it
> >inconvenience you?  Nobody's making you run 'make modules_install'.
> >I often forget to myself.
> 
> OK, I'll get really silly here myself. I don't want even that half a second 
> of
> overhead when that module is being _built_ (during make modules), not
> the overhead of copying / installing at modules_install time.

You're claiming that 0.7 second (I just timed it on a 3 year old
laptop) *inconveniences* you?

> I apologize if I sounded impolite, and I certainly don't want to act
> demanding / difficult or anything, but it's just that doing this via a sysfs
> attribute (or hey, anything else!) sounds a better way to tackle this than
> this module thing. IMHO, at least.

This whole thing is such a tempest in a teapot.  I really don't
understand why you care so much.
-
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/