linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the tree

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: <20131108080221.GA31866@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 8 Nov 2013 00:02:21 -0800
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the  tree

On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:56:17PM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> So, I don't think the iov_iter stuff is the right approach for solving
> the loop issue; it's an ugly hack and after immutable biovecs we're
> pretty close to a better solution and some major cleanups too.

All the consumers aren't limited to a block-based filesystem backing,
including loop.  So we need a file-ops based approach for in-kernel
dio/aio.  If you have a counter proposal please at least describe 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/