linux-kernel - Re: Persistent Reservation API V2

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:59:54 +0200
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Persistent Reservation API V2

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 11:56:36PM +0000, Keith Busch wrote:

> NVMe can also specify
> if whether or not a reservation should persist through power-loss.

SCSI does as well, it's the APTPL flag.  However reservations not persistent
through a power loss are basically useless, so I decided to force them on
in the API.  From the documentation:

"All implementations are expected to ensure the reservations survive
 a power loss"

So I would prefer not to add it, or if we really have to as a negative flag
to specifically opt out of the APTPL behavior.

> with it. For example, NVMe can ignore existing keys when acquiring a
> reservation in addition to registering a new key.

This sounds like a sensible addition to me, and I wouldn't be surprised
if future SPC versions will add this flag.
--
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/