On Fri, 24 May 2013 00:40:11 +0400
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Now that we see the size of the patch diff between fixing the bug and
> doing proper error returns, I'm really not convinced this should be
> done as a single bug fix patch. The modify all error returns is big
> and if we missed one, it will cause problems that will manifest as an
> oops, so it makes a fairly compact fix a big error prone patch.
>
> What about two patches: one to fix the actual bug (this patch), which
> could go now and one to change the return type, which would go in the
> normal merge window.
That would certainly be safer (apologies for not getting to this before
the merge window).
I can split these modifications from the return type changes tomorrow.
This would include fixes to address new and previous patch comments:
- v1: If callers are passing in __GFP_WAIT, then blk_get_request
should only fail if the device queue is dead, so it would be
more appropriate to return -ENODEV. (Jens)
- v1: scsi_eh_lock_door is defined as void, don't return errno
(Bart)
- v1: drivers/block/paride/pd.c :: pd_special_command should check
blk_get_request return value
- v4: the error path introduced in sg_scsi_ioctl should free the
buffer
Thanks,
-- Joe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
