linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] don't forget to call pd_online

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <F94C24D1-0904-4A42-B8BC-366C95CB9803@kernel.dk>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2017 20:59:42 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     zhouchengming <zhouchengming1@...wei.com>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        miaoxie@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] don't forget to call pd_online_fn when activate policy


> On Mar 10, 2017, at 8:46 PM, zhouchengming <zhouchengming1@...wei.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2017/3/10 23:12, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 03/08/2017 07:20 PM, Zhou Chengming wrote:
>>> When we activate policy on the request_queue, we will create policy_date
>>> for all the existing blkgs of the request_queue, so we should call
>>> pd_init_fn() and pd_online_fn() on these newly created policy_data.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhou Chengming<zhouchengming1@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  block/blk-cgroup.c | 6 ++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
>>> index 8ba0af7..0dd9e76 100644
>>> --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
>>> +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
>>> @@ -1254,6 +1254,12 @@ int blkcg_activate_policy(struct request_queue *q,
>>>          pd->plid = pol->plid;
>>>          if (pol->pd_init_fn)
>>>              pol->pd_init_fn(pd);
>>> +
>>> +        if (pol->pd_online_fn) {
>>> +            spin_lock(blkg->blkcg->lock);
>>> +            pol->pd_online_fn(pd);
>>> +            spin_unlock(blkg->blkcg->lock);
>>> +        }
>> 
>> You didn't even compile this, did you?
>> 
> 
> Sorry for my carelessness. It's a very minor change, so I didn't compile...
> I will send a patch-v3 that I have compiled. Sorry again..

I don't care how trivial it seems. You always ALWAYS compile and test. Always. Don't ever send untested patches again, and not even compiling is unforgivable.