linux-kernel - Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/3] dm-target: target

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:42:01 +0800
From:	"Cheng Renquan (程任全)" 
	<crquan@...il.com>
To:	"Alasdair G Kergon" <agk@...hat.com>
Cc:	"device-mapper development" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/3] dm-target: target_type improvements

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:19:42PM +0800, crquan@...il.com wrote:
>> From: Cheng Renquan <crquan@...il.com>
>> 3. totally remove tt_internal;
>> The 3rd patch may be controversial,
>> But I still think it's worth it:
>
> Well now that it's down to just one field for linking items I'm inclined to
> agree that it's OK.
>
> Do you (or anyone else) have any interest in creating and testing similar sets
> of patches for the other parts of device-mapper that use the same construction?

I just came across the device-mapper code and made the patches one
month ago, I want to know you (dm-dev)'s attitude toward this type of
struct reconstruction. Now I know it and can do more.

>
> Alasdair
> --
> agk@...hat.com

BTW, why you set Reply-to field to my email address? Maybe an accident
of your mail client?

-- 
Cheng Renquan (程任全), Shenzhen, China
Groucho Marx  - "I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury."