Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in bio_endio()"

2018-06-19 Thread Jens Axboe
On 6/19/18 12:17 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2018-06-19 at 14:16 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: >> I take it if we had a test for request based dm in blktests or somewhere that >> probably would have caught this much easier :/ > > I'm working on porting the srp-test software to the

Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in bio_endio()"

2018-06-19 Thread Bart Van Assche
On Tue, 2018-06-19 at 14:16 -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > I take it if we had a test for request based dm in blktests or somewhere that > probably would have caught this much easier :/ I'm working on porting the srp-test software to the blktests framework. Bart.

Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in bio_endio()"

2018-06-19 Thread Jens Axboe
On 6/19/18 11:26 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > Commit 0ba99ca4838b ("block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in > bio_endio()") breaks the dm driver. end_clone_bio() detects whether > or not a bio is the last bio associated with a request by checking > the .bi_next field. Commit 0ba99ca4838b clears

Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in bio_endio()"

2018-06-19 Thread Mike Snitzer
On Tue, Jun 19 2018 at 1:26pm -0400, Bart Van Assche wrote: > Commit 0ba99ca4838b ("block: Add warning for bi_next not NULL in > bio_endio()") breaks the dm driver. end_clone_bio() detects whether > or not a bio is the last bio associated with a request by checking > the .bi_next field. Commit