linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] scsi: mpt: Refactor and port to dma

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: <20200916164411.hkpmqigdhgdb66dl@lenovo-laptop>
Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 17:44:11 +0100
From:   Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@...il.com>
To:     "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Cc:     Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@...il.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] scsi: mpt: Refactor and port to dma_* interface

On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:12:06PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> 
> Alex,
> 
> > Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!
> 
> Have you tested your changes?

No, as I'm afraid I don't have the hardware.

For patch #1 though, I'm not sure that's such an issue, as the
refactoring was really simple, even though the diffstat has ended up
being quite large! I probably should have submitted that one
individually without the RFC tag. Absolutely loads of functions have a
sleepFlag parameter, but I only found one case where this was actually
set to NO_SLEEP. Otherwise, if you follow the call stack it always ends
up being a sleeping case. I verified this by changing functions one at a
time and compile testing. Would you like me to resend this separately? I
feel that this should probably be merged in any case before we discuss
any of the other changes.

If someone who does have the hardware would like to test it though, that'd be
great :-)

Best,
Alex

> 
> -- 
> Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering