linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V10 0/8] block, bfq: extend bfq to support multi-actuator drives

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:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 08:12:59 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc:     Arie van der Hoeven <arie.vanderhoeven@...gate.com>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rory Chen <rory.c.chen@...gate.com>,
        Glen Valante <glen.valante@...aro.org>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 0/8] block, bfq: extend bfq to support multi-actuator
 drives

On 12/15/22 8:04 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> 
> 
>> Il giorno 13 dic 2022, alle ore 18:17, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> ha scritto:
>>
>> Please don't top post...
>>
>> On 12/13/22 10:10?AM, Arie van der Hoeven wrote:
>>> We understand being conservative but the code paths only impact on a
>>> product that is not yet in market.  This is version 10 spanning months
>>> with many gaps waiting on review.  It's an interesting case study.
>>
>> That's a nice theory, but that's not how code works. As mentioned, the
>> last version was posted 1-2 weeks later than would've been appropriate
>> for inclusion.
>>
> 
> So, what's the plan?

Looks like 1/8 and 8/8 still need Damien to review it, then queue up for
6.3 when ready. Not sure why this is even a question, it just means that
inclusion is pushed a release out as it missed the current merge window.

-- 
Jens Axboe