From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754219AbbGXIeF (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2015 04:34:05 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:31902 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753670AbbGXIeD (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2015 04:34:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:33:47 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Sudip Mukherjee Cc: Dexuan Cui , "pebolle@tiscali.nl" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "jasowang@redhat.com" , "driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org" , "olaf@aepfle.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "stefanha@redhat.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "apw@canonical.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to send/recv hvsock packet and get the r/w-ability Message-ID: <20150724083347.GV5371@mwanda> References: <1437476293-6837-1-git-send-email-decui@microsoft.com> <87zj2pk3jf.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <4538264677374d43961c2d709afb1dd3@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150722103546.GO5371@mwanda> <75f1792c788e418eaddc0d6b7e3381de@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150723101057.GQ5371@mwanda> <20150723102449.GR5371@mwanda> <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:57:01AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the > relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0 > is returned (without any flag). Yeah. You're right. I looked through my list again this morning and they all seem fine... regards, dan carpenter From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to send/recv hvsock packet and get the r/w-ability Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:33:47 +0300 Message-ID: <20150724083347.GV5371@mwanda> References: <1437476293-6837-1-git-send-email-decui@microsoft.com> <87zj2pk3jf.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <4538264677374d43961c2d709afb1dd3@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150722103546.GO5371@mwanda> <75f1792c788e418eaddc0d6b7e3381de@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150723101057.GQ5371@mwanda> <20150723102449.GR5371@mwanda> <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "pebolle@tiscali.nl" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "jasowang@redhat.com" , "driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org" , "olaf@aepfle.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "stefanha@redhat.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "apw@canonical.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" To: Sudip Mukherjee Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org Sender: "devel" List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:57:01AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the > relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0 > is returned (without any flag). Yeah. You're right. I looked through my list again this morning and they all seem fine... regards, dan carpenter From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:33:47 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to send/recv hvsock packet and get the r/w-ability Message-ID: <20150724083347.GV5371@mwanda> References: <1437476293-6837-1-git-send-email-decui@microsoft.com> <87zj2pk3jf.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <4538264677374d43961c2d709afb1dd3@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150722103546.GO5371@mwanda> <75f1792c788e418eaddc0d6b7e3381de@SIXPR30MB031.064d.mgd.msft.net> <20150723101057.GQ5371@mwanda> <20150723102449.GR5371@mwanda> <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150724062701.GA5525@sudip-PC> List-ID: To: Sudip Mukherjee Cc: Dexuan Cui , "pebolle@tiscali.nl" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "jasowang@redhat.com" , "driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org" , "olaf@aepfle.de" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "stefanha@redhat.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "apw@canonical.com" , "davem@davemloft.net" On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:57:01AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the > relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0 > is returned (without any flag). Yeah. You're right. I looked through my list again this morning and they all seem fine... regards, dan carpenter