Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 10/21/21 8:42 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 08:34:38AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> Incremental, are you happy with that comment?
>>
>> Looks fine to me.
>
> OK good, can I add your ack/review? I can send out a v3 if needed, but
> seems a bit pointless for that small change.
>
> Jeff, are you happy with this one too?
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index 397bfafc4c25..66c6e0c5d638 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -550,7 +550,7 @@ static void lo_rw_aio_do_completion(struct loop_cmd *cmd)
> blk_mq_complete_request(rq);
> }
>
> -static void lo_rw_aio_complete(struct kiocb *iocb, long ret, long ret2)
> +static void lo_rw_aio_complete(struct kiocb *iocb, u64 ret)
> {
> struct loop_cmd *cmd = container_of(iocb, struct loop_cmd, iocb);
>
> @@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static int lo_rw_aio(struct loop_device *lo, struct loop_cmd *cmd,
> lo_rw_aio_do_completion(cmd);
>
> if (ret != -EIOCBQUEUED)
> - cmd->iocb.ki_complete(&cmd->iocb, ret, 0);
> + lo_rw_aio_complete(&cmd->iocb, ret);
> return 0;
I'm not sure why that was part of this patch, but I think it's fine.
I've still got more testing to do, but you can add:
Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'll follow up if there are issues.
Cheers,
Jeff
