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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 12:57:39 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>, "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/21] libnvdimm: infrastructure for btt devices Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> writes: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> wrote: >> Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> writes: >> >>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 02:46:16PM -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>>> Don't screw up rw_page. The point of rw_page is to read or write a page >>>> cache page. It can sleep, and it indicates success by using the page >>>> flags. Don't try and scqueeze rw_bytes into it. If you want rw_bytes >>>> to be a queue operation, that's one thing, but don't mess with rw_page. >>> >>> Oh, I forgot about the page manipulating nature. Yes, we'll need a different >>> operation in this case. >> >> I didn't see this addressed in the new patch set. I'm also concerned >> about the layering, but I haven't put enough time into it to really make >> a better suggestion. I really dislike the idea of yet another device >> stacking model in the kernel and I'm worried the code will go in, and the >> sysfs interface will end up as a "user abi" and we won't be able to >> change it in the future. >> >> Dan, have you made any progress on this, or do you have plans to? > > ? in v6 ->rw_bytes() moved from libnvdimm local hackery to a top-level > block device operation. Is that your concern or something else? Hmm, I guess I was conflating two things. I see now that you did move the rw_bytes into the block device operations, that looks good. I'll table my concerns over yet another stacking model until I can say something intelligent about it. Cheers, Jeff -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists