All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Takeo Tung <kernel@takeo.idv.tw>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	sfr@canb.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - Re: block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 09:48:51 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100708094851.6dc6199d@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100707231732.GA30007@lst.de>

On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:17:32 +0200
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 07:05:39AM +0800, Takeo Tung wrote:
> > Dear Christoph,
> > 
> > I was check the patch again. I found the panic status haapen on Soft RAID 
> > 1. I review it. found some define using bool, so some like ( x & REQ_SYNC) 
> > only 0 or 1.
> > so if bi_rw = rw | sync will bi_rw = rw | 0 or rw | 1. not rw | ( 1 << 
> > __REQ_SYNC).
> > 
> > So I write a patch is fix it. seems normal now. could you review the patch 
> > or any comment?
> 
> The patch looks correct to me, although your mailer mangled the
> whitespace badly.  If Neil wants to keep the flag as bool we could
> also add a !! around the bit flag checks.

I think it is best to make them "unsigned long" holding the actual but.
They were only made 'bool' because that is was bio_rw_flagged() returned.
Converting to a bool then back to a bit-flag is unnecessary.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-07 23:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-11 15:13 linux-next-20100608 will /bin/sh: scripts/basic/fixdep: Permission denied Takeo Tung
2010-06-11 20:07 ` Michal Marek
2010-06-12  8:44   ` Takeo Tung
2010-06-12  9:49     ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-12 19:35       ` Takeo Tung
2010-06-28 10:52       ` block: unify flags for struct bio and struct request will kernel panic Takeo Tung
2010-07-07 23:05         ` [PATCH] struct io panic on raid1 - " Takeo Tung
2010-07-07 23:17           ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-07 23:48             ` Neil Brown [this message]
2010-07-08  0:43               ` Takeo Tung
2010-07-08  1:15                 ` Neil Brown
2010-07-08  1:42                   ` Takeo Tung

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100708094851.6dc6199d@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kernel@takeo.idv.tw \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.