linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] zpool: add zpool_has

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: <CALZtONAJUSDLfSdEzGx-AuKP9EHKw+ChLO+ZVnJ-NjoFe8zzYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:01:10 -0400
From:	Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
To:	Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net>
Cc:	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] zpool: add zpool_has_pool()

>>On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 Aug 2015 18:00:26 -0400 Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > If there's some reason why this can't happen, can we please have a code
>>>> > comment which reveals that reason?
>>>>
>>>> zpool_create_pool() should work if this returns true, unless as you
>>>> say the module is rmmod'ed *and* removed from the system - since
>>>> zpool_create_pool() will call request_module() just as this function
>>>> does.  I can add a comment explaining that.
>>>
>>> I like comments ;)
>>>
>>> Seth, I'm planning on sitting on these patches until you've had a
>>> chance to review them.
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks Andrew.  I'm reviewing now.  Patch 2/3 is pretty huge.  I've got
>> the gist of the changes now.  I'm also building and testing for myself
>> as this creates a lot more surface area for issues, alternating between
>> compressors and allocating new compression transforms on the fly.
>>
>> I'm kinda with Sergey on this in that it adds yet another complexity to
>> an already complex feature.  This adds more locking, more RCU, more
>> refcounting.  It's becoming harder to review, test, and verify.
>>
>> I should have results tomorrow.
>
>So I gave it a test run turning all the knobs (compressor, enabled,
>max_pool_percent, and zpool) like a crazy person and it was stable,
>and all the adjustments had the expected result.
>
>Dan, you might follow up with an update to Documentation/vm/zswap.txt
>noting that these parameters are runtime adjustable now.
>
>The growing complexity is a concern, but it is nice to have the
>flexibility.  Thanks for the good work!
>
>To patchset:
>
>Acked-by: Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net>
>

Hi Seth!

FYI, for whatever reason I'm still not directly getting your emails :(
 I use gmail, if that helps...I don't know if there's a problem on
your end or mine...at least this time I knew to check the list archive
;-)

Thanks for reviewing!  I'll send a patch to update zswap.txt also.

Andrew, would you prefer an additional patch to update zswap.txt, or
should I roll up that patch and the other few correction patches and
resend this patch set?
--
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/