linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mmc: block: Add write packing control

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]

Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2012 09:45:21 +0530
From:	"S, Venkatraman" <svenkatr@...com>
To:	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
Cc:	Muthu Kumar <muthu.lkml@...il.com>, merez@...eaurora.org,
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	DOCUMENTATION <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mmc: block: Add write packing control

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jul 15 2012, Muthu Kumar wrote:
>>> I've already replied to a later version of the patch, but just to get
>>> this comment in at the appropriate point of the discussion as well:
>>>
>>> Even though it would result in a cleaner sysfs, I don't want to do
>>> this now because it will break userspace scripts that are depending
>>> on the current locations of these attributes.
>>
>> Maya is adding a new sysfs attribute with that patch. So, there should
>> not be any user space stuff that depends on it.
>
> In the later patchset, Maya's "[PATCH v4 1/2] mmc: card: Move MMC
> specific attributes to mmc sub-directory" moves the existing attributes
> into the mmc/ directory.
>
> It's that move that I'm objecting to, rather than the creation of a new
> directory -- although since we're going to leave the current attributes
> where they are, it might not make sense to add the new directory.
>
> We'd be creating two places that people have to look for mmc-related
> attributes, which is arguably less clean than having one place to look
> even though it's mixed in with the other block device attributes.
>

It's better to normalise this eventually. It would be better if we create a
duplicate sysfs entry within MMC, which is identical to the current
block layer attribute. Then schedule the block layer attribute to be
removed by, say, 3.9. [Add it to Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt]

Since it is a MMC specific attribute, generic tools wouldn't depend on it.
--
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/