linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] blk-mq: always use __blk_mq_alloc

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: <20230629052828.GD16819@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jun 2023 07:28:28 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     chengming.zhou@...ux.dev
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, tj@...nel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zhouchengming@...edance.com,
        ming.lei@...hat.com, hch@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] blk-mq: always use __blk_mq_alloc_requests() to
 alloc and init rq

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 08:45:44PM +0800, chengming.zhou@...ux.dev wrote:
> After these cleanup, __blk_mq_alloc_requests() is the only entry to
> alloc and init rq.

I find the code a little hard to follow now, due to the optional
setting of the ctx.  We also introduce really odd behavior here
if the caller for a hctx-specific allocation doesn't have free
tags, as we'll now run into the normal retry path.

Is this really needed for your timestamp changes?  If not I'd prefer
to skip it.