linux-kernel - hv block drivers

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201008301643.42253.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Mon, 30 Aug 2010 16:43:42 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Hank Janssen <hjanssen@...rosoft.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"'virtualization@...ts.osdl.org'" <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: hv block drivers

Hi Hank,

I wanted to follow up on the block device driver discussion we had at
LinuxCon, based on some other input I got.

What most people recommended was to make both the hv scsi and the
hv ata code scsi device drivers, *not* make them standalone block
drivers as I originally recommended.

The main reason for this is consistent naming of the devices. We
have a lot of user code that can deal with /dev/sd* devices, but
introducing the /dev/vd* devices for virtio caused a lot of pain
that you probably shouldn't have to go through.

I'm not sure whether the two should be one or two drivers. My
feeling here is that it might be nice to have a single scsi
host driver for both that has two modes of driving the device,
one sending the SCSI commands down the virtual bus, the other
one interpreting the SCSI commands in the same way that libata
does.

	Arnd
--
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/