linux-kernel - Re: blk-mq: allow passing in an external queue mapping V3

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: <de5c219e-fe1f-7524-6054-995ae2f734ae@fb.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:34:42 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
CC:     <tglx@...utronix.de>, <agordeev@...hat.com>,
        <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: blk-mq: allow passing in an external queue mapping V3

On 09/15/2016 08:32 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Thanks for all the testing and the review Keith, as well as the
> fixes earlier.
>
> Jens, what do you think of the series?
>
> Thomas has added the first 5 patches to
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/log/?h=irq/for-block
>
> so it would be great if we could pull that into a block branch and
> get the rest into the block tree sooner or later.

I was going to ask about splitting it, but that looks fine, I can pull
that in.

The series looks fine to me. My only real concern is giving drivers the
flexibility to define mappings, I don't want that to evolve into drivers
(again) doing stupid things wrt mappings. As long as we keep it strictly
as a tunnel for passing mappings defined by the (previous blk-mq) core
code, then that's fine.

-- 
Jens Axboe