linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] zram: introduce comp algorithm fallback functionality

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:	Tue, 15 Sep 2015 16:07:00 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@...onical.com>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] zram: introduce comp algorithm fallback
 functionality

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:03:51 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > When the user supplies an unsupported compression algorithm, keep the
> > previously selected one (knowingly supported) or the default one (if the
> > compression algorithm hasn't been changed yet).
> > 
> > Note that previously this operation (i.e. setting an invalid algorithm)
> > would result in no algorithm being selected, which means that this
> > represents a small change in the default behaviour.
> 
> It seems it is hard for Andrew to parse so I will add more.

Thanks ;)

What's missing here is an understandable-by-andrew *reason* for the
patch.  What's wrong with the old behaviour and why is the new
behaviour better?


--
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/