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  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, 23 Jan 2017 10:42:16 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <>
To:     Paolo Valente <>
CC:     Jens Axboe <>, <>,
        Linux-Kernal <>,
        Omar Sandoval <>,
        Linus Walleij <>,
        Ulf Hansson <>,
        Mark Brown <>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v4] blk-mq-scheduling framework

On 01/23/2017 10:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Il giorno 18 gen 2017, alle ore 17:21, Jens Axboe <> ha scritto:
>> On 01/18/2017 08:14 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> according to the function blk_mq_sched_put_request, the
>>> mq.completed_request hook seems to always be invoked (if set) for a
>>> request for which the mq.put_rq_priv is invoked (if set).
>> Correct, any request that came out of blk_mq_sched_get_request()
>> will always have completed called on it, regardless of whether it
>> had IO started on it or not.
> It seems that some request, after being dispatched, happens to have no
> mq.put_rq_priv invoked on it now or then.  Is it expected?  If it is,
> could you point me to the path through which the end of the life of
> such a request is handled?

I'm guessing that's a flush request. I added RQF_QUEUED to check for
that, if RQF_QUEUED is set, you know it has come from your get_request

I'm assuming that is it, let me know.

Jens Axboe

Powered by blists - more mailing lists