linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] blk-flush: fix rq->flush.seq for post-flush requests

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230710133024.GA23157@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jul 2023 15:30:24 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     chengming.zhou@...ux.dev
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, ming.lei@...hat.com,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        zhouchengming@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] blk-flush: fix rq->flush.seq for post-flush
 requests

On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 02:47:04PM +0800, chengming.zhou@...ux.dev wrote:
> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
> 
> If the policy == (REQ_FSEQ_DATA | REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH), it means that the
> data sequence and post-flush sequence need to be done for this request.
> 
> The rq->flush.seq should record what sequences have been done (or don't
> need to be done). So in this case, pre-flush doesn't need to be done,
> we should init rq->flush.seq to REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH not REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH.
> 
> Of course, this doesn't cause any problem in fact, since pre-flush and
> post-flush sequence do the same thing for now.

I wonder if it really doesn't cause any problems, but the change for
sure looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

It should probably go before your other flush optimizations and maybe
grow a fixes tag.