On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 11:33 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Stop poking into block layer internals and just open the block device
> file an use kernel_read and kernel_write on it. Note that this means
> the transformation from name_to_dev_t can't be used anymore, and proper
> block device file
hi Christoph,
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:27 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> this series cleans up and massively simplifies the pstore-blk code,
> please take a look.
Thanks for your code. I am going to redesign pstore/blk referred to
your idea.
I want to split pstore/blk into two
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:28 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Use the human readable device name instead of the device number, and
> add the required best_effort parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
> ---
> Documentation/admin-guide/pstore-blk.rst | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:27 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> Introduce an abritrary 128MiB cap to avoid malloc failures when using
> a larger block device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
> ---
> fs/pstore/zone.c | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/zone.c
On 2019-01-18 08:17, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:01 AM liaoweixiong
> wrote:
>>
>> To enable pmsg, just set pmsg_size when block device register blkzone.
>
> At first pass, this looks like a reasonable extension of blkzone. Is
> it possible to add console, ftrace, etc, too?
>
I
On 2019-01-18 08:21, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 4:15 PM Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:01 AM liaoweixiong
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It is a sample for pstore_blk, using general ram rather than block device.
>>> According to pstore_blk, the data will be saved to ram
On 2019-01-08 05:47, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:01 AM liaoweixiong
> wrote:
>>
>> Why should we need pstore_block?
>> 1. Most embedded intelligent equipment have no persistent ram, which
>> increases costs. We perfer to cheaper solutions, like block devices.
>> In fast, there is
hi Tony:
On 2019-01-04 01:18, Luck, Tony wrote:
> I'm curious why you call this "pstore/rom" rather than the more descriptive
> "pstore/block".
Because there is "pstore/ram", so i name it as "pstore/rom".
It's nice to rename it "pstore/block", i will change it in next version
of patch.
>
> It
hi ,
On 2018/12/17 16:16, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi liaoweixiong,
>
> Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on kees/for-next/pstore]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.20-rc7 next-20181214]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us
在 2018年12月13日 02:43, Kees Cook 写道:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:24 AM liaoweixiong
wrote:
Reference to commit 58eb5b670747 ("pstore: fix crypto dependencies"),
which fixed crypto dependencies of deflate, lzo, lz4 and lz4hc
compression, but omitted 842 and newer compression zstd from
commit
In fast, there is no any failure while building or configuring on the
newest codes.
The patch of commit 58eb5b670747 ("pstore: fix crypto dependencies")
makes the pstore itself select the crypto core if PSTORE_COMPRESS is
set. This fixes the dependence bug at all in my tests.
But this patch
11 matches
Mail list logo
