linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/42] v7: separate operations from flags in the bio/request structs

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: <x49d1p2c1nx.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 03 May 2016 16:44:02 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	mchristi@...hat.com
Cc:	linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	konrad.wilk@...cle.com, drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com,
	philipp.reisner@...bit.com, lars.ellenberg@...bit.com,
	linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	target-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	osd-dev@...n-osd.org, xfs@....sgi.com, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/42] v7: separate operations from flags in the bio/request structs

mchristi@...hat.com writes:

> The following patches begin to cleanup the request->cmd_flags and
> bio->bi_rw mess. We currently use cmd_flags to specify the operation,
> attributes and state of the request. For bi_rw we use it for similar
> info and also the priority but then also have another bi_flags field
> for state. At some point, we abused them so much we just made cmd_flags
> 64 bits, so we could add more.
>
> The following patches seperate the operation (read, write discard,
> flush, etc) from cmd_flags/bi_rw.
>
> This patchset was made against linux-next from today April 15
> (git tag next-20160415).
>
> I put a git tree here:
> https://github.com/mikechristie/linux-kernel.git
> The patches are in the op branch.

Hi, Mike,

That git tree doesn't seem to exist.  I did manage to apply your patch
set on top of next-20160415, though.

So... what testing did you do? ;-) I ran into the following problems:
- git clone fails
- yum segfaults
- many blktrace/blkparse issues, including incorrect cpu recorded in
  traces, null task names, and blkparse outputting nothing for a trace
  file several gigabytes in size.

After that, I decided to back out your patches and test the base
linux-next kernel.  That kernel has none of those issues.

So, either I'm missing some dependencies, or I think we've got some
issues to iron out before this thing goes in.  Before I dig any further,
am I missing something?

Cheers,
Jeff