linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before initializing procedure

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]

Date:   Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:54:36 -0700
From:   Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>, axboe@...com,
        sagi@...mberg.me, maxg@...lanox.com, james.smart@...adcom.com,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before
 initializing procedure

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:14:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/19/68
> > Suggested-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
> 
> Why does this have a signoff from Keith?

Right, I hadn't signed off that. I just trying to get feeback if
someting like that was closing the theoretical gap, which it does.

I actually have something similar in my patch queue I was about to send
around this area, though. I don't like having the IO path take on the
error handling, and I think ending unstarted requests directly will be
better long term.