linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] Support DAX for device-mapper dm-linear devices

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, 21 Jun 2016 16:56:03 +0000
From:	"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To:	"dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"sandeen@...hat.com" <sandeen@...hat.com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
	"agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>,
	"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
	"snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
	"viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>, "axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>,
	"ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com" <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Support DAX for device-mapper dm-linear devices

On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:45 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 09:25 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Kani, Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
 :
> > > > I think GENHD_FL_DAX is more appropriate since DAX does not use a
> > > > request queue, except for protecting the underlining device being
> > > > disabled while direct_access() is called (b2e0d1625e19).
> > > > 
> > > > About protecting direct_access, this patch assumes that the
> > > > underlining device cannot be disabled until dtr() is called.  Is this
> > > > correct?  If not, I will need to call dax_map_atomic().
> > >
> > > Kernel internal usages of dax should be using dax_map_atomic() to
> > > safely resolve device removal races.
> >
> > Will do.  In such case, shall I move dax_[un]map_atomic() to block_dev.c
> > and rename them to bdev_dax_[un]map_atomic()?
>
> Sounds good to me.  I know Jeff and Christoph don't like the current
> calling convention of passing in a structure.  Just note that they
> might ask you to change it back to a list of parameters if it moves to
> bdev_dax_map_atomic().

OK, I will change it back to a list of parameters as well.

Thanks,
-Toshi