[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB32E7B3D53@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:31:51 +0000
From: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>
To: nick <xerofoify@...il.com>,
"Berg, Johannes" <johannes.berg@...el.com>
CC: "ilw@...ux.intel.com" <ilw@...ux.intel.com>,
"kvalo@...eaurora.org" <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
"Altman, Avri" <avri.altman@...el.com>,
"eliad@...ery.com" <eliad@...ery.com>,
"Peer, Ilan" <ilan.peer@...el.com>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linuxwifi] [PATCH] iwlwifi:Fix error handling in the function
iwl_pcie_enqueue_hcmd
On 07/22/2015 08:30 PM, nick wrote:
>
>
> On 2015-07-22 01:28 PM, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 07/22/2015 07:39 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
>>> This fixes error handling in the function iwl_pcie_enqueue_hcmd
>>> by checking if all calls to the function wl_pcie_txq_build_tfd
>>> have failed by returning a error code and if so jump to the goto
>>> label out from the cleaning up of acquired resources before
>>
>> What tests did you run on your patch?
>>
> None did I miss something?
I can't really accept a patch if you don't even test it, right?
Your patch doesn't look problematic at first glance, but hitting
these paths isn't easy and I am not very happy to change the behavior
without direct testing.
--
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