linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: Fix qemu boot hang problem

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:	Mon, 11 Aug 2014 09:21:49 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Venkatesh Srinivas <venkateshs@...gle.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC:	"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
	Webb Scales <webbnh@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: Fix qemu boot hang problem

On 08/11/2014 08:33 AM, Venkatesh Srinivas wrote:
> Should we wrap the sdev->device_busy read and test in a new
> scsi_device_busy(), so as to preserve the old polarity?
>
I don't see a difference in polarity, or at least replacing '== 0' with '!'
is not a reverse in polarity for me. Anyway, I don't really care if
or how this is wrapped, as long as it is getting fixed.

Thanks,
Guenter

--
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/