linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4 of 7] block: bio 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]

Date:	Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:41:41 -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 4 of 7] block: bio data integrity support

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

>>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> writes:
> Jeff> Hmm, up until this point you use bi to mean bio_integrity, but
> Jeff> now it means blk_integrity.  Confusion will ensue.  ;)
>
> Err, uhm.  There is no bio_integrity.  There's the bio integrity
> payload which I always refer to as struct bip *bip.  And struct
> blk_integrity which is always bi.  I'm also anal about using bv for
> the data bio_vec and iv for the integrity bio_vec.  I can't see any
> place where I'm inconsistent.

Wow, I have no idea where I got that impression.  Sorry!

> Jeff> struct blk_integrity_exchg is not yet defined in your patch set,
> Jeff> so this will likely break git bisect.
>
> bio-integrity.patch and blk-integrity.patch are artificially split up
> to ease the review process.  They are not meant to be separate
> changesets.

OK, just wanted to make sure you were aware of it.

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/