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  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, 18 Jul 2014 08:11:31 -0700
From:	"Christoph Hellwig (hch@...radead.org)" <hch@...radead.org>
To:	"Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@...com>
Cc:	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
	"michaelc@...wisc.edu" <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
	"Christoph Hellwig (hch@...radead.org)" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"ohering@...e.com" <ohering@...e.com>,
	"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] [SCSI] Fix a bug in deriving the FLUSH_TIMEOUT from
 the basic I/O timeout

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:51:06AM +0000, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
> SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (16) should be favored over SYNCHRONIZE 
> CACHE (10) unless SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (10) is not supported.

I gues you mean (16) for the last occurance?  What's the benefit of
using SYNCHRONIZE CACHE (16) if we don't pass a LBA range?

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists