linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] block: ensure we don't truncate top bits of the request command flags

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:	Thu, 24 Mar 2016 21:08:53 -0500
From:	Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] block: ensure we don't truncate top bits of the
 request command flags

On 03/22/2016 02:01 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 03/22/2016 12:59 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:55:15AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> Some of the flags that we want to use from the make_request_fn path
>>> are now larger than 32-bit, so change the functions involved to
>>> accept an u64 instead of an unsigned int.
>>
>> When did we start doing that?  We really should merge Mike's split
>> of the operation style flags into the cmd_type before making things
>> even worse in the flags area.
> 
> Just now, and I ran into it last week as well, for a test patch on cfq
> that passed in higher flags for get_request -> may_queue() as well. We
> can do Mike's split first, I think it's a good cleanup. As a standalone
> series, I needed it though.
> 

Hey, did you want any changes on that patchset? I was going to repost it
with the kbuild fix against linux-next, but I can make any changes you
wanted first.