linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout

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: <yq1h9dbrmwf.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
Date:	Thu, 02 Jun 2016 23:06:56 -0400
From:	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Shaohua Li <shli@...com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sitsofe@...oo.com,
	snitzer@...hat.com, axboe@...com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
	Kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: correctly fallback for zeroout

>>>>> "Christoph" == Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> writes:

Christoph> As part of that I also removed the strange EOPNOTSUPP ignore,
Christoph> but Mike reverted it just because it changed something in the
Christoph> dm testsuite.

Mike?

Christoph> I still believe we should never ignore it in this helper, and
Christoph> only do so in callers that believe it's the right thing.

Yeah.

I really wish EOPNOTSUPP would just go away except for ioctl callers.
Now that we have real bi_error I don't understand why we need it.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering