linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] KVM updates for the 2.6.38 merge window

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: <4D2C8FF8.5060806@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 Jan 2011 19:14:32 +0200
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] KVM updates for the 2.6.38 merge window

On 01/11/2011 06:19 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Avi Kivity<avi@...hat.com>  wrote:
>> What are your issues with the patch?
> My issues are mainly two-fold:
>
>   - I think "MINOR" is a totally idiotic and meaningless term. It has
> no technical meaning. Why would IO be special? Is it because of
> deadlock concerns with filesystem or block device layer locks? No. And
> it clearly isn't about "sleeping", since a major fault can be
> non-sleeping (think ramdisk, for example).
>
>     Look at the other FAULT_FLAG_xyzzy flags. They have _hard_
> technical reasons. There's no ambiguity. And we ALREADY HAVE the one
> that says "return if it would need to wait", and it's called
> FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY.
>

Okay; I'll drop that patch, and look at reusing the existing infrastructure.

> The other issue is:
>
>   - I wasn't aware of this, and clearly not enough other people were
> either, or somebody would have told you that we already had people
> working on the whole FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY thing that is much fancier
> and technically superior.
>
> So it simply boils down to the fact that I don't think
> FAULT_FLAG_MAJOR was a good idea. It's badly done, is a total and
> utter hack, and I don't see why I should ever merge it.

And I'll improve the process on core patches as well.

--
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/