| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1309328751.23597.109.camel@sauron> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:25:47 +0300 From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> To: David Wagner <david.wagner@...e-electrons.com> Cc: Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@...rot.com>, "dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: new module ubiblk: block layer on top of UBI On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 17:32 +0200, David Wagner wrote: > On 06/28/2011 04:50 PM, Matthieu CASTET wrote: > > Hi, > > > [...] > > Also what are the advantage against gluebi + mtdblock_ro ? > > The main advantage is a reduced number of layers ; I must say I cannot > see much more for now. I could add that the Kconfig help of gluebi > advises not to use it except when needed by legacy software. Well, I think Matthieu has a valid poit, you should try to come up with a set of advantages, otherwise why would this drivers be needed? Why would people spend time reviewing it? May be less memcpy's? Do we do an extra memcpy in gluebi? If yes, can we avoid doing this. Anyway, please, try to sell this driver a bit better. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists