linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0 of 7] Block/SCSI Data Integrity Support

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: <x49mylt9lbn.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:49:48 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 7] Block/SCSI Data Integrity Support

"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> writes:

>>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> writes:
> Jeff> Thanks for all of the great documentation.  It would be good to
> Jeff> include some instructions on how one would test this, and what
> Jeff> testing you performed.
>
> modprobe scsi_debug dix=199 dif=1 guard=1 dev_size_mb=1024 num_parts=1
>
> I'm testing with XFS and btrfs.  Generally doing kernel builds, etc.
> ext2/3 are still problematic because they modify pages in flight.

So, is it safe to say that the library routines for integrity-aware file
systems have not been tested at all?  Specifically, I'm talking about:
bio_integrity_tag_size
bio_integrity_set_tag
bio_integrity_get_tag

> Jeff> block/blk-core.c: In function 'generic_make_request':
> Jeff> include/linux/bio.h:469: sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed
> Jeff> in call to 'bio_i ntegrity_enabled': function body not available
> Jeff> block/blk-core.c:1388: sorry, unimplemented: called from here
> Jeff> make[1]: *** [block/blk-core.o] Error 1 make: *** [block] Error
> Jeff> 2
>
> Odd.  Which compiler are you using?  Compiles just fine for me on both
> EL5 and FC9.

gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20071124 (Red Hat 4.1.2-41)

> Judging from the error I'm guessing it's objecting to the inlining.
> Tried to work around it.  Please pull, update and let me know whether
> that did the trick.

I did a new clone (just to be sure I got your change) and I get the same
problem.  I also can't see the changeset in the log, so are you sure you
pushed it?

I got rid of the inline in the definition in bio.h.  The .c file didn't
define the function as inline, so I didn't have to change it.  It seems
to be building now.

Cheers,

Jeff
--
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/