netdev - Re: Distributed storage.

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: <20070807120523.GX5245@kernel.dk>
Date:	Tue, 7 Aug 2007 14:05:23 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
Cc:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Distributed storage.

On Sun, Aug 05 2007, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> A simple way to solve the stable accounting field issue is to add a new 
> pointer to struct bio that is owned by the top level submitter 
> (normally generic_make_request but not always) and is not affected by 
> any recursive resubmission.  Then getting rid of that field later 
> becomes somebody's summer project, which is not all that urgent because 
> struct bio is already bloated up with a bunch of dubious fields and is 
> a transient structure anyway.

Thanks for your insights. Care to detail what bloat and dubious fields
struct bio has?

And we don't add temporary fields out of laziness, hoping that "someone"
will later kill it again and rewrite it in a nicer fashion. Hint: that
never happens, bloat sticks.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html