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
next prev parent 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox