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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:08:25 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
Cc:	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	James Simmons <uja.ornl@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: Handle nodemask on UMP machines

On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 11:34:55AM -0500, James Simmons wrote:
> For UMP and SMP machines the struct cfs_cpt_table are
> defined differently. In the case handled by this patch
> nodemask is defined as a integer for the UMP case and
> as a pointer for the SMP case. This will cause a problem
> for ost_setup which reads the nodemask directly. Instead
> we create a UMP version of cfs_cpt_nodemask and use that
> in ost_setup.
> 
> Signed-off-by: James Simmons <uja.ornl@...il.com>
> Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-4199
> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/9219
> Reviewed-by: Liang Zhen <liang.zhen@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Li Xi <pkuelelixi@...il.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
> 
> Starting in 3.14 kernels nodemask_t was changed from a
> a unsigned long to a linux bitmap so more than 32 cores
> could be supported. Using set_bit in cfs_cpt_table_alloc
> no longer compiles so this patch backports bits of the
> node management function that use a linux bitmap back
> end. Cleaned up libcfs bitmap.h to use the libcfs layers
> memory allocation function. This was pulling in lustre
> related code that was not defined.
> 
> Signed-off-by: James Simmons <uja.ornl@...il.com>
> Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-4993
> Reviewed-on: http://review.whamcloud.com/10332
> Reviewed-by: Liang Zhen <liang.zhen@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Bob Glossman <bob.glossman@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>

What is with this crazy two sections of signed-off-by?  If this was 2
patches, make it two patches.

If not, then don't do this.

Also, this whole series had no numbering, so I don't know how to apply
them, please fix and resend it.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ