linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] bio: Introduce LightNVM payload

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:	Sat, 9 May 2015 09:00:07 -0700
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Matias Bj??rling <m@...rling.me>
Cc:	hch@...radead.org, axboe@...com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
	keith.busch@...el.com, javier@...etta.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] bio: Introduce LightNVM payload

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 04:26:50PM +0200, Matias Bj??rling wrote:
> LightNVM integrates on both sides of the block layer. The lower layer
> implements mapping of logical to physical addressing, while the layer
> above can string together multiple LightNVM devices and expose them as a
> single block device.
> 
> Having multiple devices underneath requires a way to resolve where the
> IO came from when submitted through the block layer. Extending bio with
> a LightNVM payload solves this problem.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matias Bj??rling <m@...rling.me>
> ---
>  include/linux/bio.h       | 9 +++++++++
>  include/linux/blk_types.h | 4 +++-
>  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/bio.h b/include/linux/bio.h
> index da3a127..4e31a1c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bio.h
> @@ -354,6 +354,15 @@ static inline void bip_set_seed(struct bio_integrity_payload *bip,
>  
>  #endif /* CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INTEGRITY */
>  
> +#if defined(CONFIG_NVM)
> +
> +/* bio open-channel ssd payload */
> +struct bio_nvm_payload {
> +	void *private;
> +};

Can you explain why this needs to be done on a per-bio instead of a
per-request level?  I don't really think a low-level driver should add
fields to struct bio as that can be easily remapped.

On the other hand in th request you can already (ab)use the ->cmd and
related fields for your own purposes.

--
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/