linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] f2fs for 4.8

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: <86e4eb4c-3cb8-8e0f-ebb4-48cdf4dea8e8@fb.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:29:38 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Linux FS Dev Mailing List" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List 
	<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] f2fs for 4.8

On 07/27/2016 11:46 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git tags/for-f2fs-4.8
>
> This got some merge conflicts with the bio interface rework
> (bio_set_op_attrs() etc), and while I tried to fix it up, I don't have
> any sane way to test the end result, so I might have screwed up
> royally.
>
> My resolution looks sane to me, and compiles, but that's all I'm
> really going to guarantee. Can you please give it a good round of
> testing, and Jens, can you check it out too. In particular, the
> fs/f2fs/data.c changes is what I might have screwed up..

Looks OK to me, though I think you could have dropped the ->bi_rw
assignment in f2fs_submit_page_bio():

         bio->bi_rw = fio->op_flags;
         bio_set_op_attrs(bio, fio->op, fio->op_flags);

         __submit_bio(fio->sbi, bio, fio->type);

-- 
Jens Axboe