[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53FCF9DB.6010501@kernel.dk>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:19:23 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...atus.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] block,scsi: fixup blk_get_request dead queue scenarios
On 08/26/2014 11:24 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...atus.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.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists