linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput

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: <09393ef1-9559-2042-6c83-75ed3fd529d3@kernel.dk>
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 19:23:24 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ulf.hansson@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        broonie@...nel.org, bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com,
        oleksandr@...alenko.name, federico@...ler.it
Subject: Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of
 throughput

On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of
> the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong
> decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on
> I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow
> contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find.

Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your
intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something that went into
this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not
normally be something to be applied at this stage.

-- 
Jens Axboe