linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] osdblk: a Linux block device for OSD objects

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Fri, 03 Apr 2009 05:58:54 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] osdblk: a Linux block device for OSD objects

Jens Axboe wrote:
> This wont work, GFP_NOIO inside the queue lock. You are also only
> cloning the front bio, what happens if you have > 1 bio on the request?
> You seem to dequeue the request and complete all of it, regardless of
> whether bio->bi_size == blk_rq_bytes(rq). I'm assuming you have to clone
> because of how the osd_req_{read,write} works, so I'd suggest storing
> the byte size in your osdblk_request and only completing that in
> osdblk_end_request(). Then do a rq_for_each_bio() look in there, and
> only dequeue if you manage to start an osd request for each of them,
> THEN moving on to the next request.

Thanks for the review.  Will fix...

	Jeff


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/