Re: [PATCH] lpfc: Resolve static check error in lpfc_nvmet.c

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 3/9/2018 5:23 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
Really, the commit message has to be descriptive.  This makes me think
this is about some annoying policy of making everything static rather
than a critical bug.

What's wrong with

lpfc: add missing unlock on defer WQFULL path

?  You can then expand on the static checker discovery in the main
message.

Since this looks to be a pretty common occurrence, perhaps this should
be folded with a rebase?

James


yeah - the title was pretty poor. Too long of a day on a friday. reposted a v2.

-- james




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux