linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 4/6] dax: add DAX_RECOVERY flag and .recovery_write dev_pgmap

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: <Yk52415cnFa39qil@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 6 Apr 2022 22:30:11 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>,
        "djwong@...nel.org" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "vishal.l.verma@...el.com" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "dave.jiang@...el.com" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>,
        "snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        "dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
        "ira.weiny@...el.com" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        "willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
        "vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev" <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/6] dax: add DAX_RECOVERY flag and .recovery_write
 dev_pgmap_ops

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 05:32:31PM +0000, Jane Chu wrote:
> Yes, I believe Dan was motivated by avoiding the dm dance as a result of
> adding .recovery_write to dax_operations.
> 
> I understand your point about .recovery_write is device specific and
> thus not something appropriate for device agnostic ops.
> 
> I can see 2 options so far -
> 
> 1)  add .recovery_write to dax_operations and do the dm dance to hunt 
> down to the base device that actually provides the recovery action

That would be my preference.  But I'll wait for Dan to chime in.

> Okay, will run the checkpatch.pl test again.

Unfortuntely checkpatch.pl is broken in that regard.  It treats the
exception to occasionally go longer or readability as the default.