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]

Message-ID: <31ba3fefcfc5352a6c41955a4e07ae8f.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org>
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
From:	merez@...eaurora.org
To:	"Chris Ball" <cjb@...top.org>
Cc:	"Muthu Kumar" <muthu.lkml@...il.com>,
	"Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>, 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

Hi Chris,

Is there anything else that holds this patch from being pushed to mmc-next?

Thanks,
Maya
On Tue, July 17, 2012 3:50 pm, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Muthu,
>
> On Mon, Jul 16 2012, Muthu Kumar wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:46 PM, 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.
>>
>> So, what is the plan for fixing the user land tools and cleaning this
>> up?
>
> At the moment I don't have any plan to do that, because the cure
> (potentially breaking userland scripts that are writing to some
> read/write attributes, by breaking ABI to move everything into a
> new directory) seems worse than the disease (having some attributes
> in a directory that isn't the ideal one).
>
> I'd be willing to explore something like Venkat's idea if the block
> layer maintainers insist, though.
>
> - Chris.
> --
> Chris Ball   <cjb@...top.org>   <http://printf.net/>
> One Laptop Per Child
>


-- 
Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum

--
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/