linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] block: Add bdev_supports

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: <1462833254.27137.113.camel@hpe.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 May 2016 16:34:14 -0600
From:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	micah.parrish@....com,
	"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] block: Add bdev_supports_dax() for dax mount
 checks

On Tue, 2016-05-10 at 07:19 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:23:03AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 12:14 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
> > > > wrote:
 :
> > > > This patch should replace blkdev_dax_capable(), or just reuse that
> > > > existing routine, or am I missing something?
> > >
> > > Good question.  bdev_supports_dax() is a helper function tailored for
> > > the filesystem's mount -o dax case.  While blkdev_dax_capable() is
> > > similar, it does not need error messages like "device does not
> > > support dax" since it implicitly enables dax when capable.  So, I
> > > think we can keep blkdev_dax_capable(), but change it to call
> > > bdev_direct_access() so that actual check is performed in a single
> > > place.
> >
> > Sounds good to me.
>
> Can you name them consistently then? i.e. blkdev_dax_supported() and
> blkdev_dax_capable()?

Sure.  Will do.

Thanks,
-Toshi