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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200710261003.19287.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 10:03:18 +1000 From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...e.hu Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] Change table chaining layout On Thursday 25 October 2007 21:54:44 Rusty Russell wrote: > On Thursday 25 October 2007 19:11:40 Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 25 2007, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > What irritates me more is that scatterlists aren't quite generically > > > useful. The virtio code wants to join a scatterlist created by > > > blk_rq_map_sg() with two others, yet it won't work because sg_chain() > > > doesn't remove the end marker from the first entry. > > > > That's a minor nit for your special purpose, we/you can change that. > > Well currently sg_chain() only joins "incomplete" (ie. unterminated) sg > chains. That works great for you, but it feels more like a special purpose > to me. > > > > If this patch weren't already included, I'd be strongly arguing for the > > > bio idea: I find the chained sg code tricksy and ugly (sorry Jens). > > > > What is the bio idea? A bio works in essentially the same way, the only > > difference is having a specific next pointer. It's still just a linked > > lists of arbitrarily sized sg tables (the bio_vec arrays). > > It was suggested by analogy earlier in this thread, to use a two-level > structure. > > In this case I would have first renamed struct scatterlist to struct > scatterelem. Then struct scatterlist looks like: > > struct scatterlist { > unsigned int num; > struct scatterelem elems[0]; > }; To correct my own thoughts, it'd be better to just put a "struct list_head list;" in there for chaining. That's more along standard kernel lines, and neatly handles the single-scatterlist case. Cheers, Rusty. - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists