On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 10:34:44AM -0400, Dennis Dalessandro wrote: > On 5/28/2019 9:09 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:03:42PM +0300, Gal Pressman wrote: > > > On 28/05/2019 14:37, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Like all other destroy commands, .destroy_cq() call is not supposed > > > > to fail. In all flows, the attempt to return earlier caused to memory > > > > leaks. > > > > > > > > This patch converts .destroy_cq() to do not return any errors. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This patch doesn't apply to my tree for some reason. > > > > I rebased it on top of rdma/wip/jgg-for-next branch. > > Can you provide the SHA? I pulled: ea996974 and still get conflicts applying > 2/3. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/leon/linux-rdma.git/commit/?h=rdma-next&id=039f6e8ce30ad812e2e8c3e0c35974b518d4794a https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/leon/linux-rdma.git/commit/?h=rdma-next&id=ed32c1219d35f2568a3283d7a399d79df09c4d1b https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/leon/linux-rdma.git/commit/?h=rdma-next&id=039ba0525b0e651a42eca818d117102cc4e631ff Thanks > > -Denny
