linux-kernel - RE: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

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: <2634f2cb-3e7e-4c86-b7ef-cf4a3f1e0d8a@default>
Date:	Mon, 26 Apr 2010 05:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, ngupta@...are.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, jeremy@...p.org,
	hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk, JBeulich@...ell.com,
	chris.mason@...cle.com, kurt.hackel@...cle.com,
	dave.mccracken@...cle.com, npiggin@...e.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, riel@...hat.com
Subject: RE: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

> > Maybe incremental development is better? Stabilize and refine
> existing
> > code and gradually move to async API, if required in future?
> 
> Incremental development is fine, especially for ramzswap where the APIs
> are all internal.  I'm more worried about external interfaces, these
> stick around a lot longer and if not done right they're a pain forever.

Well if you are saying that your primary objection to the
frontswap synchronous API is that it is exposed to modules via
some EXPORT_SYMBOLs, we can certainly fix that, at least
unless/until there are other pseudo-RAM devices that can use it.

Would that resolve your concerns?
--
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/