On 8/28/2016 2:35 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 12:28:13PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 09:26:13PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:17:58AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:58:32AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>>>> From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> By Mellanox HW design and SW implementation poll_cq never >>>>> fails and returns errors, so all these prints are to catch ULP bugs. >>>> >>>> Eh? How can a ULP cause poll_cq to get errors? >>>> >>>> Are you sure these are not driver bugs? >>>> >>>> Why can't you just print and discard the broken CQ entry? >>>> >>>> What should use ULP do when it get EINVAL? You say poll again is >>>> not correct, so you suggest a full QP tear down? >>> >>> See patches 4 and 6, they completely removed these EINVALs. >> >> So the commit message is still wrong. >> >> Why do we need this revert? Just squash it and mark it fixup the >> original. > > We need this revert, because the original commit is wrong and as was presented > by Sasha Levin in his talk about automatic creation of stable trees [1], he needs > this information to ensure that this commit won't be in stable tree by mistake. > > [1] > https://lcccna2016.sched.org/event/7JW4/automating-the-creation-of-stable-trees-sasha-levin-verizon-labs I didn't see the presentation at this link, but I'm not sure I agree with your statement here. There should be no difference, effectively, between a commit to revert a bad commit, and a commit to fix a bad commit that uses a Fixes: tag referencing the original commit. -- Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx> GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
