linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] blk-mq: reuse code in blk_mq_check

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: <20190930083324.GA24152@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 30 Sep 2019 01:33:24 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Pavel Begunkov (Silence)" <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] blk-mq: reuse code in blk_mq_check_inflight*()

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:27:32AM +0300, Pavel Begunkov (Silence) wrote:
> From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
> 
> 1. Reuse the same walker callback for both blk_mq_in_flight() and
> blk_mq_in_flight_rw().
> 
> 2. Store inflight counters immediately in struct mq_inflight.
> It's type-safer and removes extra indirection.

You really want to split this into two patches.  Part 2 looks very
sensible to me, but I don't really see how 1 is qn equivalent
transformation right now.  Splitting it out and writing a non-trivial
changelog might help understanding it if you think it really is
equivalent as-is.