linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2] block: do not artificially constrain max

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:	Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:10:51 +0000
From:	"Chauhan, Vijay" <Vijay.Chauhan@...app.com>
To:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
CC:	"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Stankey, Robert" <Robert.Stankey@...app.com>,
	"Moger, Babu" <Babu.Moger@...app.com>,
	"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] block: do not artificially constrain max_sectors for
 stacking drivers

On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 4:27 AM, Mike Wrote:
>As it happens, v2's changes to blk_limits_max_hw_sectors and
>blk_queue_max_hw_sectors are not strictly required in order for existing
>stacking drivers to have have an unconstrained max_sectors.  Dropping
>those changes also allows for consistency across both block functions.
>
>So I'd be happy if v1 were to be staged for 3.6.  NetApp: it would be
>great if you could confirm that v1 does in fact address the max_sectors
>issue you reported.
>
>Thanks,
>Mike

Mike, Thanks for the quick fix. I verified with Patch v1 and it resolves this issue.

Thanks,
Vijay
--
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/