On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 06:58:06AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kent.
>
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 08:00:20PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > However, I don't think it's a good idea to try to implement something
> > > which is a neutral transport of opaque data between userland and lower
>
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:15:26PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Kent Overstreet writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >> Kent Overstreet writes:
> >>
> >> > So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> >> > add an interface to pas
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 07:41:10PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:28:25AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 05:20:29PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > > > Kent Overstreet writes:
>
Hello, Kent.
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 08:00:20PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > However, I don't think it's a good idea to try to implement something
> > which is a neutral transport of opaque data between userland and lower
> > layers. Things like that sound attractive with unlimited
> > possi
Kent Overstreet writes:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Kent Overstreet writes:
>>
>> > So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
>> > add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
>> > pwrite().
>> >
>> >
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:41:06AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kent.
>
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 02:41:13PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > Seems to me it'd be no different from security considerations when
> > introducing new ioctls. I.e., messy, ad hoc, easy to get wrong, but
> > sometime
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 11:28:25AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 05:20:29PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > > Kent Overstreet writes:
> > >
> > > > So, I and other people keep running into things where we rea
Hello, Kent.
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 02:41:13PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Seems to me it'd be no different from security considerations when
> introducing new ioctls. I.e., messy, ad hoc, easy to get wrong, but
> sometimes no way around it.
>
> It really has to be ad hoc if it's extensible,
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 05:20:29PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Kent Overstreet writes:
> >
> > > So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> > > add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 01:41:17PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Kent Overstreet writes:
>
> > So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> > add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
> > pwrite().
> >
> > A few examples:
> >
> > * IO sched
> "Kent" == Kent Overstreet writes:
>> Hmm, careful here. I think that in DIF/DIX the checksums are
>> per-sector, not per IO, right? That'd mean that the PAGE_SIZE attr
>> limit in this patch would be magically creating different max IO size
>> limits on different architectures. That does
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 10:43:23AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > The generic code wouldn't know about any user pointers inside
> > attributes, so it'd have to be downstream consumers. Hopefully there
> > won't be many attributes with user pointers in them (I don't expect
> > there to be), so we won'
Kent Overstreet writes:
> So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
> pwrite().
How would you enumerate this?
How does the application know what the underlying stack supports/need?
How is ve
> The generic code wouldn't know about any user pointers inside
> attributes, so it'd have to be downstream consumers. Hopefully there
> won't be many attributes with user pointers in them (I don't expect
> there to be), so we won't have too much of this messyness.
I really don't like this. We sh
Kent Overstreet writes:
> So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
> pwrite().
>
> A few examples:
>
> * IO scheduler hints. Some userspace program wants to, per IO, specify
> either prioriti
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:44:39PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> And what about duplicate instances of a given attribute id? Use the
> first? The last? Error? Depends on the id?
I thought of a better idea, instead of explicitly checking for
disallowed dups:
We want to return -ENOTHANDLED for not
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:44:39PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > Not just per sector, Per hardware sector. For passing around checksums
> > userspace would have to find out the hardware sector size and checksum
> > type/size via a different interface, and then the attribute would
> > contain a point
> Not just per sector, Per hardware sector. For passing around checksums
> userspace would have to find out the hardware sector size and checksum
> type/size via a different interface, and then the attribute would
> contain a pointer to a buffer that can hold the appropriate number of
> checksums.
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 03:23:41PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> > add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
> > pwrite().
>
>
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 03:23:41PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
> add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
> pwrite().
Sure. Martin (cc:ed) will sympathize.
> A few examples:
>
> * IO sche
So, I and other people keep running into things where we really need to
add an interface to pass some auxiliary... stuff along with a pread() or
pwrite().
A few examples:
* IO scheduler hints. Some userspace program wants to, per IO, specify
either priorities or a cgroup - by specifying a cgroup
21 matches
Mail list logo
