Re: [PATCH 0/6] block: add support for REQ_OP_VERIFY

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 12/1/22 20:39, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 06:12:46PM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
So nobody can get away with a lie.

And yet devices do exist which lie.  I'm not surprised that vendors
vehemently claim that they don't, or "nobody would get away with it".
But, of course, they do.  And there's no way for us to find out if
they're lying!

But we'll never be able to figure that out unless we try.

Once we've tried we will have proof either way.
Which is why I think we should have that implementation.
Only then we'll know if it's worth it, both from the hardware and the application side.

Without an implementation it'll just degrade to a shouting match.

Cheers,

Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                Kernel Storage Architect
hare@xxxxxxx                              +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew
Myers, Andrew McDonald, Martje Boudien Moerman




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux