linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH block/for-next] block: don't call blk_drain

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, 4 Nov 2011 07:26:27 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-next] block: don't call blk_drain_queue() if
 elevator is not up

Hello,

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>> Heh, yeah, definitely, and just to be paranoid, this whole thing is
>> for the next merge window.
>
> Ehm, what parts? If the bug is in for-next, things are queued up for
> _this_ merge window.

So, we had four patchsets - the original drain improvements, updates
to drain improvements, cfq locking cleanup, and cfq api cleanup.
Currently, the first one is in block tree but the other three are not.
I was thinking all four were going mainline in the next merge window.

Hmmm... yeah, the first and second patchsets kinda go together but
well the first one definitely is pretty good bug fix without others,
so I guess that split isn't too bad either. Alright, no objection.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/