The function only returns -EIO if rq->errors is non-zero, which is not
very useful and lets a large number of callers ignore the return value.
Just let the callers figure out their error themselves.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-exec.c | 8 +---
block/scsi_i
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 05:39:21PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The function only returns -EIO if rq->errors is non-zero, which is not
> very useful and lets a large number of callers ignore the return value.
>
> Just let the callers figure out their error themselves.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chri
On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 17:39 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/blocklayout.c b/fs/nfsd/blocklayout.c
> index 92b4b41d19d2..4b72fdf67548 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/blocklayout.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/blocklayout.c
> @@ -242,8 +242,8 @@ static int nfsd4_scsi_identify_device(struct block_dev
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 08:03:22PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> That blk_execute_rq() call can only be reached if a few lines above 0 was
> assigned to the "error" variable. Since nfsd4_scsi_identify_device() returns
> the value of the "error" variable I think -EIO should be assigned to that
> v
On 04/14/2017 02:22 AM, h...@lst.de wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 08:03:22PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> That blk_execute_rq() call can only be reached if a few lines above 0 was
>> assigned to the "error" variable. Since nfsd4_scsi_identify_device() returns
>> the value of the "error" vari
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:01:09AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Are you respinning this series for 4.12?
Yes, I think I got enough feedback by now to resend it. I'll try to
get it out today.
6 matches
Mail list logo