linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Some improvements for blk-throttle

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: <822998a7-4cc7-88ee-8b3f-e8e7660a5b0a@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 14 Sep 2020 19:37:53 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, tj@...nel.org
Cc:     baolin.wang7@...il.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Some improvements for blk-throttle

On 9/7/20 2:10 AM, Baolin Wang wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> This patch set did some clean-ups, as well as removing some unnecessary
> bps/iops limitation calculation when checking if can dispatch a bio or
> not for a tg. Please help to review. Thanks.
> 
> Baolin Wang (5):
>   blk-throttle: Fix some comments' typos
>   blk-throttle: Use readable READ/WRITE macros
>   blk-throttle: Define readable macros instead of static variables
>   blk-throttle: Avoid calculating bps/iops limitation repeatedly
>   blk-throttle: Avoid checking bps/iops limitation if bps or iops is    
>     unlimited
> 
>  block/blk-throttle.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

Looks reasonable to me, I've applied it.

Out of curiosity, are you using blk-throttle in production, or are these
just fixes/cleanups that you came across?


-- 
Jens Axboe