On 08/27/2014 05:07 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 08/26/2014 04:01 PM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Jens Axboe <ax...@kernel.dk> writes:
<>
> There's also a bug in osd_initiator.c, _init_blk_request(). We jump to
> 'out' for IS_ERR(req), which attempts to print or->request, which hasn't
> been assigned yet.
You mean this code:
req = _make_request(q, has_out, has_out ? &or->out : &or->in, flags);
if (IS_ERR(req)) {
ret = PTR_ERR(req);
goto out;
}
or->request = req;
But _make_request used to already return -ENOMEM as a pointer in req
So if this is a bug it was not introduced by this patch.
And it is not a bug at all the print prints the pointer. The all of
this code assumes osd_request was allocated ZERO set. the print of %p
is fine with NULLs (and any number for that matter)
> This is my primary concern with this patch, basically
> every single of these call sites must be verified or it will do more
> harm than good. Have they been?
>
I have reviewed this patch for osd part, it is fine
Thanks
Boaz
--
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/
