linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120620085724.GA26295@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 04:57:24 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2]block: handle merged discard request

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:53:02PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> Nope, it's broken. But if you check my write same patches you'll see
> that I actually return the correct completion size there.
> 
> There are several additional commands in the pipeline where the 1:1
> mapping between DMA size and block range is invalid. I want to get rid
> of the 1:1 assumption in general so we can handle any command without
> these evil workarounds.

What's the progress on getting these issues sorted out?

--
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/