All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
	device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: fix leaks associated with discard request payload
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 08:46:09 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100701124609.GA19605@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007010803040.18570@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>

On Thu, Jul 01 2010 at  8:28am -0400,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> wrote:

> > > It is either/or choice. If the interface isn't fixed NOW, the existing 
> > > flawed zeroed-page-allocation interface gets into RHEL
> > 
> > That's a false dichotomy.  You might see an either apply this hack now
> > or support the interface choice with RHEL, but upstream has the option
> > to fix stuff correctly.  RHEL has never needed my blessing to apply
> > random crap to their kernel before ... why is this patch any different?
> 
> We can't apply non-upstream patches (except few exceptions such as 
> dm-raid45). It makes sense, non-upstream patches have smaller test 
> coverage.
> 
> > And the rest of this rubbish is based on that false premise.  It might
> > help you to take off your SCSI antipathy and see this as a system
> > problem: it actually originates in block and spills out from there.
> > Thus it requires a system solution.
> > 
> > James
> 
> Imagine this: I take a FPGA PCI board, I design a storage controller on it 
> and this controller will need 3 pages to process a discard request. Now I 
> say: I refuse to allocate these 3 pages in the driver because the driver 
> would look ugly --- instead, I demand that everyone in the Linux kernel 
> who creates a discard request must attach 3 pages to the request for my 
> driver.
> 
> Do you think it is correct behavior? Would you accept such a driver? I 
> guess you wouldn't! But this is the same thing that you are doing with 
> SCSI.
> 
> Now lets take it a bit further and I say "I may clean up the driver for my 
> controller one day, when I do it, I remove that 3-page requirement --- and 
> then, everyone who allocated those pages will have to change his code and 
> remove the allocations".
> 
> And this is what you are intending to do with SCSI.

Mikulas,

Jens has already queued up a comprehensive fix (3 patches) that James
and Tomo developed.  Please stop the hostility.. it has no place.

Others,
I'd encourage you to not respond to this thread further ;)

Regards,
Mike

  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-01 12:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-18 14:59 [PATCH, RFC] block: don't allocate a payload for discard request Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-19  4:25 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-22 18:00   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-26 19:56     ` [PATCH 1/2] block: fix leaks associated with discard request payload Mike Snitzer
2010-06-27  8:49       ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27  9:26         ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-27 10:01           ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27 10:35             ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27 11:07               ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-27 12:32                 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27 14:16                   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-27 15:35                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-27 16:23                       ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27 15:33                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-28  7:57                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-28  8:14                     ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-28  8:18                       ` Jens Axboe
2010-06-28  8:45                         ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-28  8:45                           ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-28 15:25                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-30 11:55                         ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-07-01  4:21                           ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-27  9:38       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-27 15:29       ` James Bottomley
2010-06-28 17:16         ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-06-29  8:00           ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-29 22:28         ` [dm-devel] " Mikulas Patocka
2010-06-29 23:03           ` James Bottomley
2010-06-29 23:51             ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-29 23:51               ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-30  0:11             ` [dm-devel] " Mikulas Patocka
2010-06-30 14:22               ` James Bottomley
2010-06-30 15:36                 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-30 16:26                   ` James Bottomley
2010-07-01 12:28                 ` [dm-devel] " Mikulas Patocka
2010-07-01 12:46                   ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2010-07-01 14:03                     ` Mikulas Patocka
2010-07-01 14:03                       ` Mikulas Patocka
2010-07-01 12:49                   ` [dm-devel] " Alasdair G Kergon
2010-06-30  8:32         ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-30  8:42           ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-30 10:25             ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-30 10:41               ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-30 10:57                 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-30 12:18                   ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-26 19:56     ` [PATCH 2/2] block: defer the use of inline biovecs for discard requests Mike Snitzer
2010-06-27  9:39       ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-27 14:00         ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-27 14:55       ` [PATCH 2/2 v2] " Mike Snitzer
2010-06-27 15:33         ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-28 10:33       ` [PATCH 2/2] " FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-28 12:29         ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-28 15:15           ` FUJITA Tomonori
2010-06-28 15:31             ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-28 12:34       ` Jens Axboe
2010-06-28 12:37         ` Mike Snitzer
2010-06-28 12:41           ` Jens Axboe
2010-06-28 12:44             ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-28 12:49               ` Jens Axboe
2010-06-28 12:45             ` Mike Snitzer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100701124609.GA19605@redhat.com \
    --to=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.