linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]block: don't delay blk_run_queue

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: <4DD38D47.9010505@kernel.dk>
Date:	Wed, 18 May 2011 11:11:35 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
CC:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]block: don't delay blk_run_queue_async

On 2011-05-18 10:42, Shaohua Li wrote:
> Let's check a scenario:
> 1. blk_delay_queue(q, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY);
> 2. blk_run_queue_async();
> the second one will became a noop, because q->delay_work already has
> WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT set, so the delayed work will still run after
> SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY. But blk_run_queue_async actually hopes the delayed
> work runs immediately.

Good catch. I wonder if it wouldn't be better to "fix"
queue_delayed_work() instead. If the time passed in is before the
scheduled event, adjust the timeout.

But as a 2.6.39 fix, this is good, will queue up.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/