linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Core block IO bits for 3.15-rc

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: <533B7A90.6060504@fb.com>
Date:	Tue, 1 Apr 2014 20:48:48 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker 
	<fweisbec@...il.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Core block IO bits for 3.15-rc

On 2014-04-01 20:43, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com> wrote:
>>
>> - Cleanup of the IPI usage from the block layer, and associated helper
>>    code. From Frederic Weisbecker and Jan Kara.
>
> So I absolutely *hate* how this was done.
>
> Why the hell was it mixed in with the block layer code? It's not even
> in some clean separate branch, it's just randomly in the middle of the
> block code, for no obvious reason.
>
> I'm pulling it this time, but quite frankly, next time I see this kind
> of ugly AND TOTALLY POINTLESS layering violation, I will just drop the
> stupid pull request.
>
> If you want to push me cleanups that are to generic code and are in no
> way specific to the block layer, fine. But I want a separate pull
> request that is not in any way mixed up with block code.
>
> In other words, this was NOT OK. This was stupid and wrong, and
> violated all sanity. I can see absolutely no reason why that
> smp_call_function_single_async() renaming and the other cleanups are
> in the block branch. They are totally separate in every single way.
>
> What the hell was going on here?

I agree, it should have been in its own topic branch. No real arguments 
there. And probably should have been split further, so only the block 
required parts ended up in there, and not eg the watchdog parts.

-- 
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/