On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 16:38 -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-08-25 at 21:03 +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote:
> >
> > > > + /* this should never happen */
> > > > + if (WARN_ON(!cmnd))
> > > > + return SCSI_MLQUEUE_HOST_BUSY;
> > > >
> > > > - if (NULL == cmnd || NULL == devip) {
> > > > - pr_warn("called with NULL cmnd or devip pointer\n");
> > > > + if (NULL == devip) {
> > > > + pr_warn("called devip == NULL\n");
> > > > /* no particularly good error to report back */
> > > > return SCSI_MLQUEUE_HOST_BUSY;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > Please refer to the patch I just posted, we can't return _HOST_BUSY here
> > > if devip == NULL. I posted a fix against the current "misc" branch as
> > > I don't see this patch applied, let me know if I need to update it.
> >
> >
> > I'm just not sure why the patches are not merged or even rejected.
>
> Because ideally I want a Maintainer ack. That's Doug Gilbert.
>
> > I'm submitting patches to the Linux kernel for more than 10 years to
> > various trees and I can agree that these are not some urgent fixes,
> > but this is the first time my effort is ignored for such long time by
> > the maintainer.
>
> Well, OK, I trust martin, I'll override the lack of Maintainer ack if
> you fix as Ewan suggests.
>
Just to clarify, I didn't have a problem with Tomas' patch per se, it's
just that my patch won't apply on top of his. I'll submit a v2 if you
want, so you can apply Tomas' patch first. The problem I'm fixing has
been in there for a while. Let me know if you want me to do that.
-Ewan
> James
>
>
> > Thanks
> > Tomas
> >
> > NrybXǧv^){.n+{"{ay ʇڙ,jfhz w j:+vwjmzZ+ݢj"!
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
