linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1] nvme: add cse, ds, ms, nsze and nuse to sysfs

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: <20231127155649.GA1403@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2023 16:56:49 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1] nvme: add cse, ds, ms, nsze and nuse to sysfs

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 08:44:52AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> > I'd probably spell out metadata_size, or probably even better
> > metadata_bytes to match the unit postfixes elsewhere in the block code.
> 
> Should this even be an nvme specific attribute? I thought we should have
> blk-integrity.c report its 'tuple_size' attribute instead. That should
> work as long as we're not dealing with extended metadata at least, but
> that's kind of a special format that doesn't have block layer support.

Reporting the tuple size is a good idea.  But is that enough for
the existing nvme-cli use case?