linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] super1: ignore failfast flag for setting device role

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: <wrfjd1d1gu09.fsf@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:01:58 -0400
From:   jes.sorensen@...il.com
To:     Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>
Cc:     neilb@...e.com, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jack Wang <jinpu.wang@...fitbricks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] super1: ignore failfast flag for setting device role

Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com> writes:
> There is corner case for setting device role,
> if new device has failfast flag.
> The failfast flag should be ignored.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jack Wang <jinpu.wang@...fitbricks.com>
> ---
>  super1.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Applied!

Ideally I would like to get rid of the hardcoded values and use the bit
defines instead, but the original code did the same, so I am going to
take it.

I am leaving out the second patch for now, per Neil's comments. If you
feel strongly about it, please conveince Neil first :)

Thanks,
Jes