linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3CEC7CEBD755411B9547FE08565197B2@TAKEOW7NB1>
Date:	Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:42:04 +0800
From:	"Takeo Tung" <kernel@...eo.idv.tw>
To:	"Neil Brown" <neilb@...e.de>
Cc:	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@....de>, "Michal Marek" <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	<sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic

Dear Neil,

Ok. bcoz I don't sure you like define is 'bool' or 'unsigned long', if using 
'unsigned long', I no problem now. sorry for my poor english.

Thanks,
Takeo Tung

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Neil Brown" <neilb@...e.de>
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:15 AM
To: "Takeo Tung" <kernel@...eo.idv.tw>
Cc: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@....de>; "Michal Marek" <mmarek@...e.cz>; 
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>; 
<sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for 
struct bio and struct request will kernel panic

> On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 08:43:38 +0800
> "Takeo Tung" <kernel@...eo.idv.tw> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> ok. I rewrite the patch back to bool and re-add bio_rw_flagged fucntion. 
>> pls
>> review it and any comment?
>
> I'm not sure why you did that.
> I meant to say that I liked the fact that you had changed from 'bool' to
> 'unsigned long' and that I thought using 'bool' was unnecessary.  Maybe I
> didn't say that very clearly.
>
> It doesn't matter to me particularly which approach is used, but please 
> don't
> re-introduce bio_rw_flagged because you think I want it - I don't.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Takeo Tung
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Neil Brown" <neilb@...e.de>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 7:48 AM
>> To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@....de>
>> Cc: "Takeo Tung" <kernel@...eo.idv.tw>; "Michal Marek" <mmarek@...e.cz>;
>> <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>;
>> <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags 
>> for
>> struct bio and struct request will kernel panic
>>
>> > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:17:32 +0200
>> > Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 07:05:39AM +0800, Takeo Tung wrote:
>> >> > Dear Christoph,
>> >> >
>> >> > I was check the patch again. I found the panic status haapen on Soft
>> >> > RAID
>> >> > 1. I review it. found some define using bool, so some like ( x &
>> >> > REQ_SYNC)
>> >> > only 0 or 1.
>> >> > so if bi_rw = rw | sync will bi_rw = rw | 0 or rw | 1. not rw | ( 1 
>> >> > <<
>> >> > __REQ_SYNC).
>> >> >
>> >> > So I write a patch is fix it. seems normal now. could you review the
>> >> > patch
>> >> > or any comment?
>> >>
>> >> The patch looks correct to me, although your mailer mangled the
>> >> whitespace badly.  If Neil wants to keep the flag as bool we could
>> >> also add a !! around the bit flag checks.
>> >
>> > I think it is best to make them "unsigned long" holding the actual but.
>> > They were only made 'bool' because that is was bio_rw_flagged() 
>> > returned.
>> > Converting to a bool then back to a bit-flag is unnecessary.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > NeilBrown
>> > --
>> > 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/
>> >
>> >
> --
> 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/
>
> 
--
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/