linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] storvsc: use small sg

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:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 22:00:59 -0800
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>, Olaf Hering <olaf@...fle.de>
Cc:	Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] storvsc: use small sg_tablesize on x86

On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 23:09 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Olaf Hering [mailto:olaf@...fle.de]
> > Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 12:35 AM
> > To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
> > Cc: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang
> > <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> > scsi@...r.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] storvsc: use small sg_tablesize on x86
> > 
> > On Fri, Oct 02, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Oct 01, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 20:30 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_32)
> > > 
> > > > Um, this is a bit architecture specific (I know Azure is x86,
> > > > but
> > > > still).  Can you make the define check CONFIG_32BIT rather than
> > > > CONFIG_X86_32?
> > > 
> > > According to arch/x86/Kconfig there is no such thing.
> > 
> > What is the status of this change? Looks like there is nothing more 
> > to do on my side.
> 
> Olaf,
> 
> We do have the config option: CONFIG_X86_64. Perhaps we could use 
> this. Could you resubmit the patch with this change.

It's not really architecture independent, is it?  Just use the bit
width config.

James