From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Doug Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 09:43:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519F1A28.6080303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369380965.1945.10.camel@dabdike>
Il 24/05/2013 09:36, James Bottomley ha scritto:
> On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 15:58 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Adjust the blk_verify_command function to let it look at per-queue
>> data. This will be done in the next patch.
>
> This is not a bug fix. This is an enabler for your complex and to my
> mind dubious rework of the SG_IO command filter. I'm running out of
> ways to say please don't mix bug fixes with features, because this
> redesignating of the original patch set as part 1 and parts 2,3 doesn't
> satisfy the requirement.
I made it part 1/2/3 because parts 2/3 depend on part 1. It makes
dependency tracking easier, at least in my mind.
If you have another solution that does not require passing request_queue
to blk_verify_command, I'm all ears.
> Does anyone in the real world actually care about this bug?
Yes, or I would move on and not waste so much time on this.
Paolo
> because if
> not perhaps we can just remove the confusion and consider this as a
> feature set. If there's someone who actually cares, please lets just do
> the bug fix first and argue about the feature later.
>
> James
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-24 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1369317503-4095-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 7:36 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 7:43 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-05-24 7:50 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 7:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 8:03 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 8:32 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 21:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-25 4:14 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-25 6:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 2/4] sg_io: prepare to introduce per-class command filters Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 3/4] sg_io: use different default filters for each device class Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 4/4] sg_io: resolve conflicts between commands assigned to multiple classes (CVE-2012-4542) Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=519F1A28.6080303@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).