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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 14:37:41 +0200
From:   Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io>
To:     javier@...xlabs.com
Cc:     igor.j.konopko@...el.com, marcin.dziegielewski@...el.com,
        hans.holmberg@...xlabs.com, hlitz@...c.edu,
        youngtack.jin@...cuitblvd.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: move device L2P detection to core

On 08/03/2018 02:16 PM, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>> On 3 Aug 2018, at 10.54, Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io> wrote:
>>
>> A 1.2 device is able to manage the logical to physical mapping
>> table internally or leave it to the host.
>>
>> A target only supports one of those approaches, and therefore must
>> check on initialization. Move this check to core to avoid each target
>> implement the check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io>
>> ---
> 
> 
> I see where you want to go with these changes, but the way targets are
> layered on top of the LightNVM subsystem does not align with it.
> LightNVM can support different OCSSD versions and capabilities, but that
> does not mean that a target (e.g., pblk) does. The way I see it, core
> should only check for (i) the drive to expose itself in a known revision
> and (ii) the reported structures to be consistent. However, specific
> functionality is not for core to check upo.

Why try to initialize a target, if we already know that it is incompatible?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ