linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] SCSI host lock push-down

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: <AANLkTikYdrNSn7of7fcwgXwQqDaHTD3Vcuh1=MAKP_dB@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:26:03 -0500
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] SCSI host lock push-down

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
>>
>> Move the mid-layer's ->queuecommand() invocation from being locked
>> with the host lock to being unlocked to facilitate speeding up the
>> critical path for drivers who don't need this lock taken anyway.
>
> Looks ok to me. How should I take this? Just as a patch? Or should it
> go through the scsi tree?

Directly as a single patch (v5), if James acks; otherwise through
jejb/scsi-rc-fixes.git I would presume.

     Jeff
--
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/