From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:40446 "EHLO userp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728833AbfC2Oek (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:34:40 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] block: verify data when endio From: "Martin K. Petersen" References: <20190329142346.1677-1-bob.liu@oracle.com> <20190329142346.1677-3-bob.liu@oracle.com> <41c8688a-65bd-96ac-9b23-4facd0ade4a7@kernel.dk> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 10:34:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <41c8688a-65bd-96ac-9b23-4facd0ade4a7@kernel.dk> (Jens Axboe's message of "Fri, 29 Mar 2019 08:28:23 -0600") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Jens Axboe Cc: Bob Liu , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, shirley.ma@oracle.com, allison.henderson@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, darrick.wong@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org, adilger@dilger.ca, tytso@mit.edu 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. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering