linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] nvme-tcp: no need to quiesec admin_q in nvme_tcp_teardown_io

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: <20241125072240.GB15647@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 08:22:40 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: "brookxu.cn" <brookxu.cn@...il.com>
Cc: kbusch@...nel.org, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me,
	linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] nvme-tcp: no need to quiesec admin_q in
 nvme_tcp_teardown_io_queues()

On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 09:37:38PM +0800, brookxu.cn wrote:
> From: "Chunguang.xu" <chunguang.xu@...pee.com>
> 
> As we quiesec admin_q in nvme_tcp_teardown_admin_queue(), so we should no
> need to quiesec it in nvme_tcp_reaardown_io_queues(), make things simple.

Yes.  And this matches what RDMA is doing.  We really need to go
back to the attempt to consolidaste this code..

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