On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 16:12 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2017-05-09 at 21:32 -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 18:10 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > [ ... ] > > > As I have already explained in another e-mail: the above change is completely wrong. > > > > In any event, this is the patch I'll be merging for -rc1 to restore > > existing behavior to avoid the OOPsen your change has introduced. > > Hello Nic, > > In case it wouldn't be clear, my reply counts as a NAK. Please add the > following to that patch before you send it to Linus: > > NAK-ed-by: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Listen, your patch in target-pending/for-next broke existing behavior for WRITE_VERIFY because you never bothered to test the original patch with overflow, so I'm going to include this bug-fix in my PULL request so it doesn't trigger an OOPs. Otherwise I'll just revert your original patch and be done with it for -rc1. Which do you prefer..? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe target-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html