Hi Linus,
Three small (really, one liners all of them!) fixes that should go into
this series:
- Request allocation error handling fix for nbd, from Christophe, fixing
a regression in this series.
- lightnvm fix for a bad offset calculation, also a regression in this
series. From Matias.
- Finally, an oops fix for drbd. Not a regression in this series, but
stable material. From Richard.
Please pull!
git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-linus
----------------------------------------------------------------
Christophe JAILLET (1):
nbd: Fix error handling
Matias Bjørling (1):
lightnvm: invalid offset calculation for lba_shift
Richard Weinberger (1):
drbd: Fix kernel_sendmsg() usage - potential NULL deref
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_main.c | 2 +-
drivers/block/nbd.c | 2 +-
drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--
Jens Axboe
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> Three small (really, one liners all of them!) fixes that should go into
> this series:
What about the aoeblk one? That seems to have come in with a tester
lately. From your original email:
"I'm wondering if this is bio iteration breakage. aoeblk does this weird
inc/dec of page counts, which should not be needed. At least others
would be hit by this as well. In any case, should suffice for a test,
before we look further. Can anyone test with this debug patch?"
Anyway, that bug seems to have been around forever and I'm not seeing
a lot of complaints, but I thought I'd ask.
Your oneliners pulled. Except when I pull, I don't actually get this one:
Matias Bjørling (1):
lightnvm: invalid offset calculation for lba_shift
but since you know how very deeply I care about lighnvm, I'm not
finding it in myself to worry about why that one was missing.
Linus
On 11/11/2016 05:45 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Linus,
>>
>> Three small (really, one liners all of them!) fixes that should go into
>> this series:
>
> What about the aoeblk one? That seems to have come in with a tester
> lately. From your original email:
>
> "I'm wondering if this is bio iteration breakage. aoeblk does this weird
> inc/dec of page counts, which should not be needed. At least others
> would be hit by this as well. In any case, should suffice for a test,
> before we look further. Can anyone test with this debug patch?"
>
> Anyway, that bug seems to have been around forever and I'm not seeing
> a lot of complaints, but I thought I'd ask.
I was going to queue that one up for 4.10, but we can go with 4.9 as
well. I don't think it's a huge deal. And, as per the below, looks like
I'm sending another round next week anyway.
> Your oneliners pulled. Except when I pull, I don't actually get this one:
>
> Matias Bjørling (1):
> lightnvm: invalid offset calculation for lba_shift
>
> but since you know how very deeply I care about lighnvm, I'm not
> finding it in myself to worry about why that one was missing.
Yes, I remember you made that clear :-)
I forgot to push that one out after applying the other day, apparently,
and missed that git request-pull complained. But worry not, I'll include
that in the next round. It's still a merge window regression.
--
Jens Axboe