linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH block/for-next] block: don't call blk_drain

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:	Fri, 4 Nov 2011 07:30:05 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-next] block: don't call blk_drain_queue() if
 elevator is not up

Hello,

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>> Hmmm... yeah, the first and second patchsets kinda go together but
>> well the first one definitely is pretty good bug fix without others,
>> so I guess that split isn't too bad either. Alright, no objection.
>
> OK, I'll push off what I have now and then we can queue #2 up shortly. I
> would probably prefer pushing the cfq locking cleanup to 3.3 to get some
> more testing time on that, but it all depends on what your level of
> confidence in it is?

Not that confident. Those definitely belong to the next window.

Thank you.

-- 
tejun
--
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/