On 11/11/2016 05:45 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Linus,
Three small (really, one liners all of them!) fixes that should go into
this series:
What about the aoeblk one? That seems to have come in with a tester
lately. From your original email:
"I'm wondering if this is bio iteration breakage. aoeblk does this weird
inc/dec of page counts, which should not be needed. At least others
would be hit by this as well. In any case, should suffice for a test,
before we look further. Can anyone test with this debug patch?"
Anyway, that bug seems to have been around forever and I'm not seeing
a lot of complaints, but I thought I'd ask.
I was going to queue that one up for 4.10, but we can go with 4.9 as
well. I don't think it's a huge deal. And, as per the below, looks like
I'm sending another round next week anyway.
Your oneliners pulled. Except when I pull, I don't actually get this one:
Matias Bjørling (1):
lightnvm: invalid offset calculation for lba_shift
but since you know how very deeply I care about lighnvm, I'm not
finding it in myself to worry about why that one was missing.
Yes, I remember you made that clear :-)
I forgot to push that one out after applying the other day, apparently,
and missed that git request-pull complained. But worry not, I'll include
that in the next round. It's still a merge window regression.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
