linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] scsi: ufs: Introduce HPB module

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]

Message-ID: <3d5748ce4481c789000979f9831a5ae681cd9d34.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 20:24:18 +0200
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>
To:     daejun7.park@...sung.com, Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>,
        ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>,
        "beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        "cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
        "bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
        "tomas.winkler@...el.com" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
Cc:     "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sang-yoon Oh <sangyoon.oh@...sung.com>,
        Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@...sung.com>,
        yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@...sung.com>,
        Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@...sung.com>,
        Adel Choi <adel.choi@...sung.com>,
        BoRam Shin <boram.shin@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] scsi: ufs: Introduce HPB module

On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 19:30 +0900, Daejun Park wrote:
> > > implemented
> > > as a module parameter, so that it can be configurable by the
> > > user.
> > > 
> > > To gurantee a minimum memory pool size of 4MB:
> > > $ insmod ufshpb.ko ufshpb_host_map_kbytes=4096
> > 
> > You are going through a lot of troubles to make it a loadable
> > module.
> > What are, in your opinion, the pros and cons of this design
> > decision?
> 
> In my opinion...
> 
> pros:
> 1. A user can unload an unnecessary module when there is an
> insufficient
> memory situation (HPB case).
> 2. Since each UFS vendor has a different way of implementing UFS
> features,
> it can be supported as a separate module. Otherwise, many quirks must
> be attached to module, which is not desirable way.
> 3. It is possible to distinguish parts that are not necessary for
> essential
> ufs operation.
> 4. It is advantageous to implement the latest functions according to
> the
> development speed of UFS.
> 
> cons:
> 1. It is difficult work to be implemented as a module.
> 2. Modifying "ufsfeature.c" is required to implement the feature that
> can
> not supported by the exsiting "ufsf_operation".
> 
> Thanks,
> Daejun

Dear Avri, Daejun, Bart

It is true that it is very difficult to make everyone happy.
We now have three HPB drivers in the patchwork, but I still didn't see
a final agreement. Please tell me which one do you want to focus on?

Bean