linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: add a bi

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: <55B2699D.6010400@kernel.dk>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:36:45 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
CC:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@...cle.com>,
	linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: add a bi_error field to struct bio

On 07/24/2015 04:49 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:59:46PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> One possible solution would be to shrink bi_flags to an unsigned int, no
>> problems fitting that in. Then we could stuff bi_error in that (new) hole,
>> and we would end up having the same size again.
>
> As long as we use set/test/clear_bt on bi_flags that won't work unfortunately.

Right, I don't think we need to do that though. If you look at the flags 
usage, it's all over the map. Some use test/set_bit, some set it just by 
OR'ing the mask. There's no reason we can't make this work without 
relying on set/test_bit, and then shrink it to an unsigned int.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/