linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] zram: factor out partial IO routine

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170331040617.GB366@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
Date:   Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:06:17 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        kernel-team@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: factor out partial IO routine

Hello,

On (03/31/17 08:33), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > a bigger side effect is that now we double the amount of lines we need
> > to change in certain patches and, thus, the amount of work - when we
> > add new functionality/fix something in zram_bvec_{write, read} we also
> > would need to touch zram_bvec_partial_{write, read}.
> 
> Yes, that is a pain, too. However, I thought it would be more easier
> because as-is partial IO routine is more error-prone to me. :)

yeah, it is quite tricky and a bit difficult. agree.

> > still probably worth it.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
>  
> Thanks for the review.
> so I tried clean-up further to make you happy. :)
> 
> How about this?
> It's totally untested and I have no time until Monday next week.
> So, please review with having enough time.

will take a look :)
thanks!

	-ss