Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH v3] staging/lustre/ptlrpc: Removes potential null dereference

On May 16, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Lidza Louina wrote: > The lustre_msg_buf method could return NULL. Subsequent code didn't > check if it's null before using it. This patch adds two checks. > > Signed-off-by: Lidza Louina Acked-by: Oleg Drokin >

Re: [PATCH] staging/lustre/ptlrpc: Removes potential null dereference

On May 12, 2016, at 6:33 PM, Lidza Louina wrote: > The lustre_msg_buf method could return NULL. Subsequent code didn't > check if it's null before using it. This patch adds two checks. Thank you for the patch, it looks good code-wise, but there are some style issues. > > Signed-off-by:

Re: staging: add Lustre file system client support

On Apr 27, 2016, at 8:28 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > Hello Lustre devs, > > The patch d7e09d0397e8: "staging: add Lustre file system client > support" from May 2, 2013, leads to the following Parfait warning. > Parfait is an Oracle static analysis tool. If there is a patch from > this could you

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Staging: Lustre: Fixed coding style issues

On Apr 17, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Panos Vlachos wrote: > Fixed one coding style issue in the > file router_proc.c (Lustre staging driver) Perhaps it's best to reference what the issue is. I.e. "Fix too long line in …" and then in the actual message add that you just split it? > > Signed-off-by:

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: libcfs: Fix warnings reported by 'make C=1'

On Apr 11, 2016, at 4:50 PM, Aleksey Fedotov wrote: > From 08473aa48a1726c09dbab43e99059be9b0e88af2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Aleksei Fedotov > Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 21:13:27 +0300 > Subject: [PATCH] staging: lustre: libcfs: Fix warnings reported by sparse A better

Re: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef

On Apr 1, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 14:23 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: >> On Apr 1, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> >>> Question about removing lustre typedefs. >>> >>> Various bits of lustre code use a mix

Re: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef

On Apr 1, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > Question about removing lustre typedefs. > > Various bits of lustre code use a mix of struct foo and foo_t. > > When would be an appropriate time to submit patches similar to > below that individually remove various typedefs from lustre code? I

Re: [staging:staging-testing 144/177] drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/libcfs/linux/linux-module.c:66:32-38: ERROR: application of sizeof to pointer

On Mar 25, 2016, at 12:49 AM, kbuild test robot wrote: > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git > staging-testing > head: 6d197476df27efdb304959845e43f69d1b971a35 > commit: b8ff756bc3513e489f24c14cfb6a8a39d3f3b150 [144/177] staging: lustre: > libcfs: merge

Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: Correct missing newline for CERROR call in sfw_handle_server_rpc

On Mar 12, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 18:32 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote: >> On Mar 12, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 13:00 -0500, James Simmons wrote: >>>> From: James Nunez <james.a.nu...@

Re: [PATCH 1/6] staging: lustre: Correct missing newline for CERROR call in sfw_handle_server_rpc

On Mar 12, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 13:00 -0500, James Simmons wrote: >> From: James Nunez >> >> This is one of the fixes broken out of patch 1 that was >> missed in the merger. With this fix the CERROR called in >>

Re: [PATCH 07/10] staging: lustre: add last missing sparse annotation __user

On Mar 4, 2016, at 9:09 PM, James Simmons wrote: > From: Frank Zago > > One of the __user was missed in being applied to upstream > client. This is broken out of patch 11819. It was not, the bug was fixed in another way. > Signed-off-by: Frank Zago >

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] staging: lustre: update modinfo data

On Feb 26, 2016, at 1:03 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:07:06PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: >> The module information for Lustre is stale or in some cases >> completely missing. This collection of patches brings the >> modinfo up to date as well as filling in any

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: Fixed the parenthesis

On Feb 14, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Shalin Mehta wrote: > The parentehsis are fixed in the macro for the ldlm lock to set and > clear the flags. > > Signed-off-by: Shalin Mehta > --- > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_dlm_flags.h | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: Fixed the parenthesis

On Feb 15, 2016, at 9:28 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 07:37:02PM -0800, Shalin Mehta wrote: >> The parentehsis are fixed in the macro for the ldlm lock to set and >> clear the flags. > > "fixed" in what way? Did you test-build this patch? Also, you > mispelled a word here…

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lov: Fix sparse warning

Hello! On Nov 21, 2015, at 3:26 AM, Paul Davies C wrote: > This patch fixes the following warnings:- > > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_object.c:926:22: warning: symbol > 'lov_lsm_get' was not declared. Should it be static? > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_object.c:942:6:

Re: [PATCH 1/9] Staging: lustre: dir: Replace function calls

On Nov 7, 2015, at 2:41 AM, Shivani Bhardwaj wrote: > Replace the calls of the function ll_finish_md_op_data() with the > standard function kfree(). For functions like this that have meaningflul name and also might include additional logic (even though they don't now), does it make sense to do

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: export cfs_str2mask

On Nov 8, 2015, at 11:34 AM, James Simmons wrote: > We need cfs_str2mask exported for our server code. > Even with the server code not available upstream > it would be nice to use the upstream code on Lustre > servers. > > Signed-off-by: James Simmons > --- >

Re: lustre: TODO updated?

Hello! On Oct 13, 2015, at 8:12 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > Is drivers/staging/lustre/TODO file updated? Yes, it's still accurate from 10.000 ft view. If you need some more detailed ideas, here's my current list of stuff: getting rid of remaining lustre allocation macros:

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre: llite: Added a blank line

On Oct 3, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Anjali Menon wrote: > Added a blank line after declaration to fix the coding > style warning detected by checkpatch.pl > > WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations > > Signed-off-by: Anjali Menon > --- >

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 04/73] staging/lustre: tracefile: document seconds overflow

On Sep 27, 2015, at 8:38 PM, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > On 2015/09/27, 10:45 PM, "gr...@linuxhacker.ru" > wrote: > >> From: Arnd Bergmann >> >> The lustre tracefile has a timestamp defined as >> >> __u32 ph_sec; >> __u64 ph_usec; >> >> which

Re: [PATCH 32/37] staging/lustre: use 64-bit times for exp_last_request_time

On Sep 24, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 24 September 2015 03:55:20 Drokin, Oleg wrote: >> On Sep 23, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >>> The last request time is stored as an 'unsigned long', which is >>> good enough unt

Re: [PATCH 32/37] staging/lustre: use 64-bit times for exp_last_request_time

On Sep 24, 2015, at 2:54 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 24 September 2015 16:01:40 Drokin, Oleg wrote: >> >> On Sep 24, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >>> On Thursday 24 September 2015 03:55:20 Drokin, Oleg wrote: >>>> On Sep

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 32/37] staging/lustre: use 64-bit times for exp_last_request_time

On Sep 24, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: Anyway this does remove a lot of stuff that we don't really need in the client, I'll try to get it built and tested just to make sure it does not really break anything (unfortunately it does not seem to apply cleanly to

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 32/37] staging/lustre: use 64-bit times for exp_last_request_time

On Sep 24, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Drokin, Oleg wrote: > > On Sep 24, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>> Anyway this does remove a lot of stuff that we don't really need in the >>>>> client, >>>>> I'll try to get it built and teste

Re: [PATCH 04/37] staging/lustre: tracefile: use 64-bit seconds

On Sep 24, 2015, at 3:46 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 24 September 2015 04:02:09 Drokin, Oleg wrote: >>> The lustre tracefile has a timestamp defined as >>> >>> __u32 ph_sec; >>> __u64 ph_usec; >>> >>> whi

Re: [PATCH 32/37] staging/lustre: use 64-bit times for exp_last_request_time

On Sep 23, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The last request time is stored as an 'unsigned long', which is > good enough until 2106, but it is then converted to 'long' in > some places, which overflows in 2038. > > This changes the type to time64_t to avoid those problems. Hm… All

Re: [PATCH 04/37] staging/lustre: tracefile: use 64-bit seconds

On Sep 23, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The lustre tracefile has a timestamp defined as > > __u32 ph_sec; > __u64 ph_usec; > > which seems completely backwards, as the microsecond portion of > a time stamp will always fit into a __u32 value, while the second > portion

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: ptlrpc: add missing include directive

Hello! On Aug 15, 2015, at 4:13 AM, Ioan-Adrian Ratiu wrote: Without including ptlrpc_internal.h, GCC gives prototype warnings pack_generic.c:642:5: warning: no previous prototype for ... It does? What version of gcc give you that, I don't see that here. Yes, but it's a non-default warning

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH v2 1/2] Staging: media: lirc: use USB API functions rather than constants

On Aug 4, 2015, at 5:48 PM, Shraddha Barke wrote: The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes these changes is as follows: @@ struct usb_endpoint_descriptor *epd; @@ - (epd-bmAttributes \(USB_ENDPOINT_XFERTYPE_MASK\|3\)) + usb_endpoint_type(epd) Signed-off-by: Shraddha Barke

Re: about ENOSYS

subject have been missing, so I filled in something. On Aug 3, 2015, at 2:18 AM, Shraddha Barke wrote: From b67c6c20455b04b77447ab4561e44f1a75dd978d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shraddha Barke shraddha.6...@gmail.com Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 11:34:19 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] Staging : lustre :

Re: lustre: LIBCFS_ALLOC

On Jun 23, 2015, at 2:23 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: It seems that libcfs_kvzalloc doesn't use any particular threshold or switchingbetween kzalloc and vmalloc, so can be replaced by ths function too? If you mean to replace all instances of LIBCFS_ALLOC with libcfs_kvzalloc (and all frees

Re: [PATCH] Staging: lusture: Remove an open coded simple_open() function

On Jun 16, 2015, at 3:03 AM, Abdul, Hussain (H.) wrote: From: Abdul Hussain hab...@visteon.com This patch removes an open coded simple_open() function and replace file operations references to the function with simple_open() instead Signed-off-by: Abdul Hussain hab...@visteon.com ---

Re: lustre: question about lov_request.c

On Jun 8, 2015, at 3:24 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: You are right, set_pga seems to be a dead member. It was alive a once, but somehow not fully removed now, so it's safe to drop the whole if and also the struct member itself. set_oabufs could be dropped as well. Looking further, in the

Re: lustre: question about lov_request.c

Hello! You are right, set_pga seems to be a dead member. It was alive a once, but somehow not fully removed now, so it's safe to drop the whole if and also the struct member itself. set_oabufs could be dropped as well. Thanks. Bye, Oleg On Jun 7, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Julia Lawall

Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes

On May 22, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: On Thu, 21 May 2015, Michael Shuey wrote: That's a task (of many) I've been putting on the back burner until the code is cleaner. It's also a HUGE change, since there are debug macros everywhere, and they all check a #define'd mask to see

Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes

On May 22, 2015, at 11:42 AM, Joe Perches wrote: On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 08:08 +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: On May 22, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: On Thu, 21 May 2015, Michael Shuey wrote: That's a task (of many) I've been putting on the back burner until the code is cleaner

Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes

On May 22, 2015, at 8:18 PM, Joe Perches wrote: I wonder what is more clear about that in your opinion ve lustre_error/lustre_debug? The fact that you have to explain this shows that it's at least misleading unless you completely understand the code. Or you know, you might take the

Re: [PATCH v4 10/13] staging: lustre: lnet: lnet: checkpatch.pl fixes

On May 22, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Joe Perches wrote: On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 21:16 +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: On May 22, 2015, at 11:42 AM, Joe Perches wrote: On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 08:08 +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: On May 22, 2015, at 1:06 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: On Thu, 21 May 2015, Michael

Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: lustre: sparse lock warning fix

On May 21, 2015, at 11:12 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: Oh, sorry, I didn't read your patch very carefully. It won't cause a deadlock. But I'm going to assume it's still not right until lustre expert Acks it. I just took a closer look and it appears original code is buggy and the patch just

Re: lustre_dlm_flags.h GPLv3 license clarification

Hello! On May 12, 2015, at 6:43 PM, George G. Davis wrote: Greetings, Resending this using the correct version of get_maintainers.pl. As recommended in the thread SPDX-License-Identifier” [1], I would like to followup with the maintainers of the file

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: remove unused variable

Hello! On May 11, 2015, at 7:43 AM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 02:31:02PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 04:17:10PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: - if (set-set_pga) { - int len = set-set_oabufs * sizeof(*set-set_pga); + if (set-set_pga)

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: code cleanup - variable declaration spacing

Hello! On May 7, 2015, at 8:09 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: Clean up spacing in some variable declarations, to be more consistent. It's small, but I need to start somewhere. Please let me know if I'm not adhering to proper procedure for trivial cleanups. It's actually Lustre coding style to

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: obd_support: Add obd_cpt_alloc function

On May 3, 2015, at 1:53 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: On Sat, 2 May 2015, Drokin, Oleg wrote: On May 2, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: Summarize OBD_CPT_ALLOC_GFP, OBD_CPT_ALLOC, and OBD_CPT_ALLOC_PTR as a function, obd_cpt_alloc. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr

Re: [PATCH 0/3 v2] Replace OBD_CPT_ALLOC etc by kzalloc_node

All three are good from my perspective. Thanks! On May 3, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: The complete semantic patch used to make this transformation is as follows: (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/). // smpl @@ expression ptr,cptab,cpt,size,gfp; @@ - OBD_CPT_ALLOC_GFP(ptr, cptab,

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

Hello! On May 2, 2015, at 4:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 01:18:48AM +, Simmons, James A. wrote: Second and far more importantly the upstream lustre code currently does not have the same level of QA with what the Intel branch gets. The bar is very very

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: obd_support: Add obd_cpt_alloc function

On May 2, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: Summarize OBD_CPT_ALLOC_GFP, OBD_CPT_ALLOC, and OBD_CPT_ALLOC_PTR as a function, obd_cpt_alloc. Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr --- Some questions: Is the name OK? Is the NULL test needed? If not, should the call to

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

Hello! On May 2, 2015, at 4:14 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 09:13:11PM +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: The patch was submitted. But it depends on a symbol that's not exported. I was not able to change that. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg83997.html But you were

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

On May 1, 2015, at 4:02 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: We are hopefully going to get rid of OBD_ALLOC_LARGE() as well, though. It's simple enough to write a function: void *obd_zalloc(size_t size) { if (size 4 * PAGE_CACHE_SIZE) return vzalloc(size); else

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

On May 1, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Simmons, James A. wrote: Yes the LARGE functions do the switching. I was expecting also patches to remove the OBD_ALLOC_LARGE functions as well which is not the case here. I do have one question still. The macro __OBD_MALLOC_VERBOSE allowed the ability to

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

Hello! On May 1, 2015, at 1:48 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: From: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr Replace OBD_ALLOC, OBD_ALLOC_WAIT, OBD_ALLOC_PTR, and OBD_ALLOC_PTR_WAIT by kalloc/kcalloc, and OBD_FREE and OBD_FREE_PTR by kfree. Nak: James Simmons jsimm...@infradead.org A simple replace

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

On May 1, 2015, at 4:58 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 08:52:37PM +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: On May 1, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 08:36:05PM +, Simmons, James A. wrote: We are hopefully going to get rid

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree

On May 1, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 08:36:05PM +, Simmons, James A. wrote: We are hopefully going to get rid of OBD_ALLOC_LARGE() as well, though. It's simple enough to write a function: void *obd_zalloc(size_t size) { if (size 4 *

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: export symbol 'getname' and 'putname'

On Apr 22, 2015, at 3:34 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 06:49:08AM +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: I know this is not going to be a popular opinion with you, but sometimes opening a file is just too expensive. 1 RPC roudntrip to open a file and then another one to close

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: export symbol 'getname' and 'putname'

On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:31 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:53:11PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: Nak on exporting symbols for broken staging code. Please get rid of the ioctls looking up path names in horrible ways in the lustre code. I agree with Christoph, we

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: export symbol 'getname' and 'putname'

On Apr 22, 2015, at 1:53 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: Nak on exporting symbols for broken staging code. Please get rid of the ioctls looking up path names in horrible ways in the lustre code. For a reference, is there a good example of a non-horrible way to look up a pathname? Thanks. Bye,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: export symbol 'getname' and 'putname'

On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:31 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 06:27:11AM +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: Nak on exporting symbols for broken staging code. Please get rid of the ioctls looking up path names in horrible ways in the lustre code. For a reference, is there a good

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: Make cfs_sched_rehash static

If you checked the code, you would see that it's used in drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/module.c too. drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/module.c:extern struct cfs_wi_sched *cfs_sched_rehash; drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/module.c: rc,

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: replace kzalloc with copy_from_user with memdup_user

Hello! On Apr 2, 2015, at 6:18 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: Julia, I wonder if you happen to have a bunch of other patches to get rid of the rest of OBD_ALLOC and OBD_FREE stuff by any chance? I can generate them again, but I wasn't clear on what was wanted. I would really prefer something

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: replace kzalloc with copy_from_user with memdup_user

On Mar 31, 2015, at 11:57 AM, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 05:15:23PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: On Tue, 31 Mar 2015, Dhere, Chaitanya (C.) wrote: This patch replaces kzalloc and copy_from_user with memdup_user call This change was detected with coccinelle tool

Re: [patch] Staging: lustre: missing curly braces in ll_setattr_raw()

Ah! Nice catch. I am not sure how I missed that while making 178ba1e0d00aca671f9a8f5f41d28fc0fe717752, it's also strange that this never triggered any ill effects in any of my testing. Thanks! On Feb 25, 2015, at 8:20 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: From the indenting, it looks like curly braces

Re: [PATCH v3] staging: lustre: fix coding style errors

On Feb 9, 2015, at 4:34 PM, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: There's a third coding style error in this file which I've chosen to not fix for clarity's sake. It is: initializing min_watchdog_ratelimit (static int) to 0 Please fix that too, it's not correct. Drop the comment there if you

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: fix coding style errors in drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/linux/linux-proc.c

On Feb 5, 2015, at 5:07 PM, Tal Shorer wrote: Signed-off-by: Tal Shorer tal.sho...@gmail.com --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/linux/linux-proc.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/libcfs/linux/linux-proc.c

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: include: lustre_update.h: Fix for possible null pointer dereference

Hello! On Jan 29, 2015, at 2:49 PM, Frank Zago wrote: @@ -165,12 +165,14 @@ static inline int update_get_reply_buf(struct update_reply *reply, void **buf, int result; ptr = update_get_buf_internal(reply, index, size); + + LASSERT((ptr != NULL size = sizeof(int)));

Re: [patch 2/2] staging: lustre: validate size in ll_setxattr()

Hello! On Oct 22, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: In that case, size == 0 seems to be the wrong value size for an lov param as well. I don't know about this. The code is very clear that size == 0 is acceptable inside the if statement. Oleg? I am not sure what if statement do you

Re: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging: Fixed sparse error directive in argument list

Hello! No, it's not the way to test the kernel version, it's the way to test internal lustre version. Either way maintaining compatibility with Lustre 1.8 and 2.0 servers should not be important anymore, so it's fine to drop this check indeed. Bye, Oleg On Oct 11, 2014, at 5:06

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: llite: Use kzalloc and rewrite null tests

On Sep 19, 2014, at 5:11 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 02:57:03AM +, Drokin, Oleg wrote: 4. Sometimes we need large allocations. general kmalloc is less reliable as system lives on and memory fragmentation worsens. So we have this allocations over 2-4 pages get

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: llite: Use kzalloc and rewrite null tests

Hello! First, thanks for your patches and efforts spent on these cleanups. On Sep 19, 2014, at 12:45 AM, Julia Lawall wrote: With respect to the upper case lower case issue, does the thing need to be a macro? I think that the lowercase is more or less fine, but only if what is behind it

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: llite: Use kzalloc and rewrite null tests

Hello! On Sep 18, 2014, at 7:43 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:24:02PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: From: Julia Lawall julia.law...@lip6.fr This patch removes some kzalloc-related macros and rewrites the associated null tests to use !x rather than x == NULL. This is

Re: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH] staging: lustre: llite: Use kzalloc and rewrite null tests

On Sep 18, 2014, at 10:57 PM, Drokin, Oleg wrote: would not be easy to do. Perhaps registered callbacks for pools that could be called on alloc and on free - though such pools would also need to allow to allocate different sized chunks too). Come think of it - we don't even need callbacks

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on macros with flow control statements

Hello! On Sep 10, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 16:06 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Joe Perches wrote: On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 11:43 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 01:38:13PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: Macros with flow

Re: [PATCH 6/7] staging: lustre: obdclass: expand the GOTO macro + break

Hello! On Sep 9, 2014, at 8:54 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: 460 #define OBD_CHECK_DT_OP(obd, op, err) \ 461 do {\ 462 if (!OBT(obd) || !OBP((obd), op)) { \ 463 if

Re: [PATCH 4/4] staging: lustre: Fix potential buffer underflow

Thanks! Actually, I do't think this function is useful on the client. From the name of it, it would have been used in the server code, but even there it was recently removed as I now see. I'll submit a removal patch. On Sep 8, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: lustre: ptlrpc: events: fix coding style issue

Apparently this was already fixed by commit 1d8cb70c7bdda47125ed551fc390aa9597c5f264 a few days ago. On Aug 31, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Sun Wang wrote: From: sunwxg 743559...@qq.com Coding style issues, the changes include: -Add sapce after ',' Signed-off-by: Sun Wang 743559...@qq.com ---

Re: [PATCH] drivers: staging: lustre: fix sparse warnings / delete unused function

On Aug 10, 2014, at 12:34 AM, Greg KH wrote: Very odd, with this patch applied, I now get a build warning: drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/config.c: In function ‘lnet_parse_ip2nets’: drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/config.c:1193:2: warning: ‘ipaddrs’ may be used uninitialized in this

Re: [PATCH v2 08/13] staging: lustre: fix multi line strings

On Aug 11, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Srikrishan Malik wrote: Fixes the following checkpatch warning: WARNING: quoted string split across lines diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_request.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_request.c index 57d903156917..6c691a4763b5 100644

Re: [bug report] forever loop in ksocknal_push()

Thanks! Liang, any comments about this? On Apr 27, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: Hello Peng Tao, The patch d7e09d0397e8: staging: add Lustre file system client support from May 2, 2013, leads to the following static checker warning:

Re: staging: add Lustre file system client support

Hello! On Apr 23, 2014, at 11:14 PM, Peng Tao wrote: Btw, what's the trick to navigating the lustre source? I normally do a make cscope but that doesn't work and I am having a very hard time with this code. I use cscope + ctags to navigate the lustre source. I guess you hit some dead

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: fix GFP_ATOMIC macro usage

Hello! On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:16 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: We have a leak checker in the kernel but most people disable it. I forget the config name. There are a bunch of useful debug configs. I actually use it at times too and it's useful (e.g. it works even if you did not wrap the

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: fix GFP_ATOMIC macro usage

Hello! On Jan 21, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: On 01/21/2014 12:02 PM, Dilger, Andreas wrote: The Lustre allocation macros track the memory usage across the whole filesystem, not just of a single structure that a mempool/slab/whatever would do. This is useful to know for debugging