linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH version 2] [SQUASHME] "FC Pass Thru support" fixed for block/for-2.6.31 tree

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]

Message-ID: <4A14322A.4000709@panasas.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 May 2009 19:39:06 +0300
From:	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	James Smart <James.Smart@...lex.Com>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <tomof@....org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <Jens.Axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH version 2] [SQUASHME] "FC Pass Thru support" fixed for
 block/for-2.6.31 tree

On 05/20/2009 07:20 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 14:47 +0000, James Bottomley wrote:
>> OK, so I think your pulling of my posmerge tree can cope with the fact
>> that I did the necessary rebasing in block for-next before I made it the
>> base of my combined tree .... think of this as a nice test.
>>
>> Just building now ... if it works, I'll push to SCSI post merge and all
>> our problems should go away.
> 
> Unfortunately the combined tree hits a BUG_ON blk-core.c:2045 when doing
> SPI domain validation.
> 
> There will be a short delay ...
> 
> James
> 
> 

I have rebased block/for-next onto linus/master which should give us the
same content?

But line 2045 is on a code comment.

if I now do a git-log v2.6.30-rc3..HEAD I have the following patches:
pick 42dad76 block: simplify I/O stat accounting
pick af498d7 block: fix the bio_vec array index out-of-bounds test
pick d616ee5 block: clear req->errors on bio completion only for fs requests
pick 268ea3d block: merge blk_invoke_request_fn() into __blk_run_queue()
pick d097b7d block: kill blk_start_queueing()
pick 3099167 block: don't set REQ_NOMERGE unnecessarily
pick 4095018 block: cleanup REQ_SOFTBARRIER usages
pick 17fc349 block: reorder request completion functions
pick 6e6732a block: reorganize request fetching functions
pick ca219b4 block: kill blk_end_request_callback()
pick ea1e706 block: clean up request completion API
pick 70a8607 block: move rq->start_time initialization to blk_rq_init()
pick fa6e42b block: implement and use [__]blk_end_request_all()
pick 861af79 block: kill rq->data
pick 6abeea3 block: make blk_do_io_stat() do the full "is this rq accountable" checks
pick 2f94129 block: catch trying to use more bits than request->cmd_flags has
pick 325f440 block: implement blk_rq_pos/[cur_]sectors() and convert obvious ones
pick 7168ea4 block: convert to pos and nr_sectors accessors
pick 209e1e4 block: drop request->hard_* and *nr_sectors
pick 80d23d0 block: hide request sector and data_len
pick 563e977 block: implement and enforce request peek/start/fetch
pick 6cd0982 block: move completion related functions back to blk-core.c
pick 3978c4e block: set rq->resid_len to blk_rq_bytes() on issue
pick 01f54fd block: Add blk_make_request(), takes bio, returns a request
pick 0d58792 block: add warning to blk_make_request()

How did you resolve the block/for-next and linus/master merge?

Thanks
Boaz
--
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/