linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: remove dead BIO_VMERGE

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20081027134137D.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date:	Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:42:07 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	jeremy@...p.org
Cc:	fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	mingo@...e.hu, jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: remove dead BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY definition

On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:58:58 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > The block layer dropped the virtual merge feature
> > (b8b3e16cfe6435d961f6aaebcfd52a1ff2a988c5). BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY
> > definition is meaningless now.
> >   
> 
> Hm, I think we still need something here, no?

I don't think so.


> I have a couple of patches to make x86 use BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE 
> instead, which would probably apply to other arches.

As I wrote, the patch doesn't look correct (I think that the first
patch is fine if some arch want to use __BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE but no
one in mainline overrides BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE):

http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/10/27/1
--
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/