linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/17] block: simplify issueing discard, write

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: <20141223102345.GC13138@infradead.org>
Date:	Tue, 23 Dec 2014 02:23:45 -0800
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dongsu Park <dongsu.park@...fitbricks.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>, Ming Lin <mlin@...ggr.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/17] block: simplify issueing discard, write_same,
 zeroout

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:48:30PM +0100, Dongsu Park wrote:
> From: Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
> 
> Simplify special cases for issueing discard, write_same, and zeroout,
> replacing bio_batch completions with submit_bio_wait(). This conversion
> is possible because generic_make_request() will now do for us what the
> code in blk-lib.c was doing manually, with the bio_batch stuff. So we
> still need some looping in case we're trying to discard/zeroout more
> than around a gigabyte, but when we can submit that much at a time
> doing the submissions in parallel really shouldn't matter.

Unless there this makes later patches simpler I don't see a good reason
to remove this parallel submission for the gain of only about 100 less
lines of code.
--
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/