[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171006223013.GB30627@debian>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 18:30:13 -0400
From: Tim Hansen <devtimhansen@...il.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
alexander.levin@....verizon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/bio: Remove null checks before mempool_destroy in
bioset_free
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 01:05:01PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/06/2017 12:45 PM, Tim Hansen wrote:
> > This patch removes redundant checks for null values on bio_pool and bvec_pool.
> >
> > Found using make coccicheck M=block/ on linux-net tree on the next-20170929 tag.
> >
> > Related to patch 9987695 that removed similar checks in bio-integrity.
>
> Applied, but ditto on the line length. Additionally, I killed that reference
> to "patch 9987695", I don't know what that means? What does that refer to?
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
The patch number I referenced is what is used on patchwork.com to
reference a patch under review. I'll leave that out in the next message.
What is the proper manner of referencing another patch thats still in
review?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists