linux-kernel - Re: [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi

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, 08 Jan 2008 23:01:07 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Osterlund <petero2@...ia.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi_cmnd->done"

On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:19:30 MST, Matthew Wilcox said:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 06:04:25PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> > Theoretically, at least.  Sometimes, in the real world, other constraints
> > enter into it...
> 
> So you're saying that you can't find reliable ways to reproduce problems
> on demand?  Those are some of the lower quality bug reports, so I don't
> think we're losing much by having you not report them.

I'm sure that *everybody* on this list would *love* to know how you find
a reliable way to reproduce all the bugs that start off with "after X days of
uptime".   But when you're chasing what might be a race condition with a
very small timing hole, you may need an event to happen several million times
before the accumulated chance of hitting it becomes appreciable.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped