linux-ext4 - Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 update for 2.6.39-rc1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:02:48 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ext4 update for 2.6.39-rc1

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>
> Please pull from:
>
>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git for_linus
>
> to get the ext4 updates for the 2.6.39 merge window.

Ok, guys, can you verify my merge? In one branch, we had Tejun change
it to use "alloc_workqueue()", and in another, ext4 switched from
create_workqueue() to create_singlethread_workqueue().

My resolution was to use WQ_UNBOUND in allow_workqueue() in the
resulting merge, which I think should be semantically the correct
resolve. But the commit message in the create_singlethread_workqueue()
change seems to imply that the single-threadedness isn't a
_correctness_ issue as much as it is just a "we don't need multiple
threads" issue, so maybe the WQ_UNBOUND isn't necessary. So WQ_UNBOUND
may or may not be a good idea.

Regardless, please give it a look, ok?

                    Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html