linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen-blkfront: remove type check from blkfront_setup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9498309b-dd60-413f-9ab7-8e6ec6c9bcfa@email.android.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:57:54 -0500
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC:	boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de>,
	Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>, xen-devel@...ts.xen.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen-blkfront: remove type check from blkfront_setup_discard

Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com> wrote:
>>>> On 13.01.14 at 14:45, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com> wrote:
>> On 13/01/14 13:16, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 13.01.14 at 14:00, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
>wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 12:34 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 13.01.14 at 13:01, Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't do this in one go - the first two and the last one may
>be
>>>>>>> set independently (and are independent in their meaning), and
>>>>>>> hence need to be queried independently (xenbus_gather() fails
>>>>>>> on the first absent value).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, thats the purpose. Since the properties are required its an
>all or
>>>>>> nothing thing. If they are truly optional then blkif.h should be
>updated
>>>>>> to say that.
>>>>>
>>>>> They _are_ optional.
>>>>
>>>> But is it true that either they are all present or they are all
>absent?
>>> 
>>> No, it's not. discard-secure is independent of the other two (but
>>> those other two are tied together).
>> 
>> Can we have a patch to blkif.h that clarifies this?
>> 
>> e.g.,
>> 
>> feature-discard
>> 
>>    ...
>> 
>>    discard-granularity and discard-offset must also be present if
>>    feature-discard is enabled
>
>It would be "may" here too afaict. But I'll defer to Konrad, who
>has done more work in this area...
>
>Jan
>
>>    discard-secure may also be present if feature-discard is enabled.
>> 
>> David
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-devel mailing list
>Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org
>http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

It is all 'may'. If there is just 'feature-discard' without any other options that is OK.

--
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/