linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme: add emulation for zone-append

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: <0e911fce1c5c6f7dc01263ecdc280e76a0ea202f.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 Aug 2020 17:26:35 -0600
From:   David Fugate <david.fugate@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@...sung.com>,
        "Damien.LeMoal@....com" <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
        "sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "johannes.thumshirn@....com" <johannes.thumshirn@....com>,
        Nitesh Shetty <nj.shetty@...sung.com>,
        SelvaKumar S <selvakuma.s1@...sung.com>,
        Javier Gonzalez <javier.gonz@...sung.com>,
        david.fugate@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme: add emulation for zone-append

On Thu, 2020-08-20 at 12:45 +0900, Keith Busch wrote:
> For the record, the suggestion provided, which you agreed to look
> into,
> most broadly enables your hardware on Linux and was entirely to your
> benefit. Not quite as dramatic as a political conspiracy.
> 
> You later responded with a technical argument against that
> suggestion;
> however, your reason didn't add up, and that's where you left the
> thread.

The suggestion to the rejected patch was passed onto the related FW
team, and the "technical argument" was our FW team's response to the
suggestion which I relayed to the list. At this point, there's no
closure on whether the device will get NOIOB.

My point in bringing up this example was a one-line, highly-
maintainable patch which improves the performance of Linux should not
have been immediatedly NAK'ed as it was. If you believe it should have,
we'll agree to disagree.