linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] convert block layer to bioset_init()/mempool

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: <87471185-1f64-2002-a7c8-f584ea6827a5@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 21 May 2018 09:18:36 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     dsterba@...e.cz, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        hch@...radead.org, colyli@...e.de, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
        clm@...com, bacik@...com, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] convert block layer to bioset_init()/mempool_init()

On 5/21/18 9:12 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 08:19:58AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/21/18 8:03 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 20 2018 at  6:25pm -0400,
>>> Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jens - this series does the rest of the conversions that Christoph wanted, and
>>>> drops bioset_create().
>>>>
>>>> Only lightly tested, but the changes are pretty mechanical. Based on your
>>>> for-next tree.
>>>
>>> By switching 'mempool_t *' to 'mempool_t' and 'bio_set *' to 'bio_set'
>>> you've altered the alignment of members in data structures.  So I'll
>>> need to audit all the data structures you've modified in DM.
>>>
>>> Could we get the backstory on _why_ you're making this change?
>>> Would go a long way to helping me appreciate why this is a good use of
>>> anyone's time.
>>
>> Yeah, it's in the first series, it gets rid of a pointer indirection.
> 
> This should to be also mentioned the changelog of each patch. There are
> 12 subsystems changed, this could be about 10 maintainers and I guess
> everybody has the same question why the change is made.

Agree, the justification should be in this series as well, of course.
Kent, might not be a bad idea to resend with a more descriptive
cover letter.

-- 
Jens Axboe