[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200205220607.m7tu6hsdr3xhm6l4@l29ah-x201.l29ah-x201>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 01:06:07 +0300
From: l29ah@...k.li
To: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
Cc: Sergey Alirzaev <l29ah@...k.li>,
v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9pnet: allow making incomplete read requests
On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 10:54:46PM +0100, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> > [...]
> > + if (n != count) {
> > + *err = -EFAULT;
> > + p9_tag_remove(clnt, req);
> > + return n;
> > }
> > - p9_tag_remove(clnt, req);
> > + } else {
> > + iov_iter_advance(to, count);
> > + count;
>
> Any reason for this stray 'count;' statement?
> If you're ok with this I'll just take patch without that line, don't
> bother resubmitting.
No reason, i've just accidentally left it.
> Will take a fair amount of time to make it to linux-next though, test
> setup needs some love and I want to run tests even if this should be
> straightforward...
Thanks!
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail
/\ http://arc.pasp.de/ - against proprietary attachments
Powered by blists - more mailing lists