linux-kernel - Re: remove exofs, the T10 OSD code and block/scsi bidi support V4

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: <2dbeeae6-6c0d-0702-acf4-73226ccf64c4@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri, 1 Feb 2019 08:13:26 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        ooo@...ctrozaur.com
Cc:     Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
        Benjamin Block <bblock@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: remove exofs, the T10 OSD code and block/scsi bidi support V4

On 2/1/19 12:55 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The only real user of the T10 OSD protocol, the pNFS object layout
> driver never went to the point of having shipping products, and we
> removed it 1.5 years ago.  Exofs is just a simple example without
> real life users.
> 
> The code has been mostly unmaintained for years and is getting in the
> way of block / SCSI changes, and does not even work properly currently,
> so I think it's finally time to drop it.
> 
> Quote from Boaz:
> 
> "As I said then. It is used in Universities for studies and experiments.
> Every once in a while. I get an email with questions and reports.
> 
> But yes feel free to remove the all thing!!
> 
> I guess I can put it up on github. In a public tree.
> 
> Just that I will need to forward port it myself, til now you guys
> been doing this for me ;-)"
> 
> Now the last time this caused a bit of a stir, but still no actual users,
> not even for SG_IO passthrough commands.  So here we go again, this time
> including removing everything in the scsi and block layer supporting it,
> and thus shrinking struct request.

I'm fine with killing it. You can add my:

Reviewed-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>

to the series.

-- 
Jens Axboe