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: <20230711120906.GA27827@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 11 Jul 2023 14:09:06 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        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 Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 07:52:11PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> On 2023/7/11 19:31, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 07:06:20PM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> >> Ok, will add a Fixes tag and send it as a separate patch since it's a bug fix.
> > 
> > Btw, it's probably not worth resending patch 2 until we've figured out
> > and dealt with the SATA flush regression that Chuck reported.
> 
> Ok, I will not resend patch 2. As for the patch 1, should I resend it as a separate patch
> or just put it in that series [1] before other flush optimizations ?

I'd wait a bit for debugging the regression.  For the worst case we'll have
to revert the patch, which currently can be done cleanly, but can't be
with that patch.