linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 00/19] lightnvm: pblk: implement 2.0 support

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: <8ef84882-b847-2b2a-7e63-a7203e8531ce@lightnvm.io>
Date:   Mon, 26 Feb 2018 19:33:42 +0100
From:   Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io>
To:     Javier Gonzalez <javier@...xlabs.com>
Cc:     "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 00/19] lightnvm: pblk: implement 2.0 support

On 02/26/2018 07:27 PM, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>> On 26 Feb 2018, at 19.24, Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io> wrote:
>>
>> On 02/26/2018 07:21 PM, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>>>> On 26 Feb 2018, at 19.19, Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 02/26/2018 02:16 PM, Javier González wrote:
>>>>> # Changes since V2:
>>>>> Apply Matias' feedback:
>>>>>   - Remove generic nvm_id identify structure.
>>>>>   - Do not remap capabilities (cap) to media and controlled capabilities
>>>>>     (mccap). Instead, add a comment to prevent confusion when
>>>>>     crosschecking with 2.0 spec.
>>>>>   - Change maxoc and maxocpu defaults from 1 block to the max number of
>>>>>     blocks.
>>>>>   - Re-implement the generic geometry to use nvm_geo on both device and
>>>>>     targets. Maintain nvm_common_geo to make it easier to copy the common
>>>>>     part of the geometry (without having to overwrite target-specific
>>>>>     fields, which is ugly and error prone). Matias, if you still want to
>>>>>     get rid of this, we can do it.
>>>>
>>>> I do, the variables should go directly in nvm_geo. Thanks.
>>> Ok. Is the rest ok with you?
>> I'll go through it when the rebase is posted. Most of the patches is
>> dependent on the first patch.
> 
> As it is now, it will be basically %s/geo->c.X/geo->X/g. If you can look
> at the first patch now, I can put all comments in a single version more,
> instead of going through one extra cycle...
> 
> 

Also the variable dev_geo -> geo. I'm good with just getting the updated 
version before posting the full patch set again.