From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bug fix patch lost: git problem or just incorrect merge?
Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 10:04:35 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1005210947440.4243@i5.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1005210931010.4243@i5.linux-foundation.org>
On Fri, 21 May 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Either way, of course, we need the patch back ...
>
> I'll fix it up.
Hmm. Pushed that out as appended, since that is the correct resolve.
HOWEVER - the code still doesn't actually make any sense. It does
if (sk_sleep(sock->sk)) {
and that sk_sleep() today is an inline function that just does
return &sk->sk_wq->wait;
and testing the result of an address-of operation for NULL is almost
certainly totally non-sensical. Sure, it _might_ work (maybe 'wait' is the
first element in the 'sk_wq' data structure, and sk_wq is NULL), but that
kind of code is always total and utterl crap regardless.
So I pushed it out because I had done the resolve already, and it's no
worse than it was before, but it's still a steaming buggy pile of shit.
It being iscsi, I can't bring myself to care. But somebody who does,
should really look at it. The most likely resolution is to remove the test
entirely, since I don't think it's ever valid to have a socket that
doesn't have a sk_wq (there's a _lot_ of unconditional use of sk_sleep()).
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-21 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-21 15:41 bug fix patch lost: git problem or just incorrect merge? James Bottomley
2010-05-21 16:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-21 17:04 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2010-05-21 17:23 ` James Bottomley
2010-05-21 22:07 ` David Miller
2010-05-21 22:02 ` David Miller
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1005210947440.4243@i5.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox