On 08/26/2014 03:19 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 08/26/2014 11:24 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote: >> Joe Lawrence <joe.lawre...@stratus.com> writes: >> >>> v2->v3: rebase to 3.16-rc2, consider return values from the >>> blk_mq_alloc_request leg of the blk_get_request callchain >>> (noted by Jeff), noted in the second patch changelog. >>> >>> blk_mq_queue_enter may return 0 or errno, which >>> blk_mq_alloc_request can propogate out via ERR_PTR. >>> __blk_mq_alloc_request doesn't include any blk_queue_dying >>> checks, so I'm assuming that its failures can be attributed >>> to -EWOULDBLOCK under !GFP_WAIT conditions. >>> >>> v1->v2: incorporate Jeff's feedback in bsg_map_hdr() and Reviewed-by >>> tags. >>> >>> Joe Lawrence (2): >>> block,scsi: verify return pointer from blk_get_request >>> block,scsi: fixup blk_get_request dead queue scenarios >> >> Jens, >> >> Did this patch set fall through the cracks again? > > Falling through the cracks implies that I meant to apply it and did not, > which was not the case. But I think we're at the point now where I'm > finally comfortable with applying it. So, Joe, could you ensure that it > applies to 3.17-rc2, then I will roll it in to the updates for 3.18.
Actually, just audited a few of them, and conversions like this: - if (!rq) + if (IS_ERR(rq)) will break spectacularly if rq == NULL is returned. Should all these be IS_ERR_OR_NULL? -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
