linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] dax-device: Some cleanups

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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:55:20 -0800
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>
Cc:     Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] dax-device: Some cleanups

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:48 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:29 PM Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I didn't get any feedback for the (implicit) v1 of this series that
> > started with Message-Id: 20210127230124.109522-1-uwe@...ine-koenig.org,
> > but I identified a few improvements myself:
> >
> >  - Use "dax-device" consistently as a prefix
> >  - Instead of requiring a .remove callback, make it explicitly
> >    optional. (Drop checking for .remove from former patch 1, introduce
> >    new patch "Properly handle drivers without remove callback")
> >  - The new patch about remove being optional allows to simplify one of
> >    the two dax drivers which is implemented in patch 4
> >  - Patch 5 got a bit smaller because we now have one driver less with a
> >    remove callback.
> >  - Added Andrew to To: as he merged dax drivers in the past.
> >
> > Andrew: Assuming you consider these patches useful, would you please
> > care for merging them?
>
> I've routed device-dax patches through Andrew when they had core-mm
> entanglements, but a pure device-dax series like this I can take
> through my tree.
>
> One small comment on patch5, otherwise looks good.

I take it back, patch5 looks good. I was going to ask about the return
value removal for dax_bus_remove(), but that would need struct
bus_type to change prototypes.

All merged to the nvdimm tree.