From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07465C43381 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAAD12183F for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:42:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="CyQGbY4J" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729334AbfC2OmK (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:42:10 -0400 Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com ([141.146.126.79]:51616 "EHLO aserp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728815AbfC2OmK (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:42:10 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2TEYKXp024448; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:42:01 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=g4x5JEl3MDDss/pGR5g5kuLrCuM4XZMFh325aQf57C4=; b=CyQGbY4J9CtNKRxcg6LM9DfVKWR7YfIAyqqvZqJvYGENsKBlUAtYHTqN0qD8T261lj45 qyzObRMpl9Lxr31fyt3GaT3jZ5xRSnEPTxKnKi5WIybR7MjHLmbBQ4gaGcEFL2xKFoiH f4G93efm8FIDql6+BnArVi1RUhgi8w0RBQ9om73Bo9PKvb20lIcf68n2qRY9fvkm5FS9 APYtylIjZ7H7uAvYKgsZLRZ582ONz4zuZhvCsrCG7qfO+j3F5KPVgHnt6Y1A5Hd3XtUC W7rq9JHZFU00f5hAx5GYopWNteBXVhaZ6JzGqKZFL/5tPRozbSTANyUReQRkBjEZ9aBQ 3A== Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2re6g1cv19-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:42:01 +0000 Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x2TEfnXt026765 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:41:50 GMT Received: from abhmp0005.oracle.com (abhmp0005.oracle.com [141.146.116.11]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x2TEfnCX030013; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 14:41:49 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.12] (/180.165.90.201) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 29 Mar 2019 07:41:49 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] block: verify data when endio To: "Martin K. Petersen" , Jens Axboe Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, shirley.ma@oracle.com, allison.henderson@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, darrick.wong@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org, adilger@dilger.ca, tytso@mit.edu References: <20190329142346.1677-1-bob.liu@oracle.com> <20190329142346.1677-3-bob.liu@oracle.com> <41c8688a-65bd-96ac-9b23-4facd0ade4a7@kernel.dk> From: Bob Liu Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 22:41:37 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9210 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903290104 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On 3/29/19 10:34 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > Jens, > >> I told you this for the initial posting, and the objection still >> stands. Adding 40 bytes to struct bio is a no-go. >> >> So that's a big NAK on that series. > > I think you missed Bob's comment that this will go in the existing > bio_integrity field. I believe the main purpose of the series is to > solicit feedback on the callback approach. > Yes, indeed!