From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ming Lei Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi-mq: Only show the CDB if available Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 00:38:25 +0800 Message-ID: <20171205163824.GB23788@ming.t460p> References: <20171205003809.1705-1-bart.vanassche@wdc.com> <20171205003809.1705-2-bart.vanassche@wdc.com> <20171205011536.GC8365@ming.t460p> <1512439190.2739.0.camel@wdc.com> <20171205050008.GA9989@ming.t460p> <1512490952.2660.18.camel@wdc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1512490952.2660.18.camel@wdc.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "jthumshirn@suse.de" , "hch@lst.de" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "hare@suse.com" , "jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 04:22:33PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 13:00 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > No, do not mix two different things in one patch, especially the fix part > > need to be backported to stable. > > > > The fix part should aim at V4.15, and the other part can be a V4.16 > > stuff. > > Does this mean that you do not plan to post a v5 of your patch and that you > want me to rework this patch series? I can do that. I believe V4 has been OK for merge, actually the only concern from James is that 'set the cmnd to NULL *before* calling free so we narrow the race window.', but that isn't required as I explained, even though you don't do that in this patch too. https://marc.info/?t=151030464300003&r=1&w=2 I will work on V5 if Martin/James thinks it is needed. -- Ming