Ira Weiny wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 01:05:47PM -0700, Ira wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 09:27:04AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > ira.weiny@ wrote: > > > > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The CDAT read may fail for a number of reasons but mainly it is possible > > > > to get different parts of a valid state. The checksum in the CDAT table > > > > protects against this. > > > > > > I don't know what "different parts of a valid state" means. > > > > This text is stale but given what I know about how other entities may be > > issuing queries without the kernel knowledge I'm not 100% sure that the data > > read back will always be valid. > > > > Regardless, this has already caught a bug in QEMU. > > > > So I'm inclined to leave this check in because the checksum is there and should > > can be validated if only to detect broken hardware. > > > > I can update the commit message to clarify this. > > Oh wait I thought this was the 'is valid' patch. > > I can remove the retries if that was all you were concerned about. > I was concerned that this patch was trying to accommodate CDAT changes while the retrieval is running which should be obviated by not allowing set-partition while the CDAT retrieval is running. So I want to see single-shot CDAT retrieval underneath set-partition protection.
