From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54B4C4332F for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 16:17:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230121AbiJQQRC (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:17:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43930 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229669AbiJQQRC (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:17:02 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x131.google.com (mail-lf1-x131.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::131]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01BF96C112; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:17:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x131.google.com with SMTP id s20so18265655lfi.11; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:17:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Rak2jXyVCxsu9w36iXtNJY2CyxL6z5W907r16DRdiwI=; b=qj3B3/oU2nQdqq2/EcGkEys8V2zPRYKApYztZr1sDPMYN5/CrNBtG7eB/6Ji3jIBBZ gIwmtUxbvubxV6rNRe66HkTwWZHR/5tGnjaB4VssHYmLTanlCxnY+c2+D14TEexwHjfs oqP1Z56YT0KnmfPy/0V2VoRxK4ljmlWedjGvrg/DQVrbKRMX8UPqSJzUfFqWls1Cwzuh 2ICcU7flL1ktzlxt+Pn3BgCrK93edMP4Z0xs/de9TkUZqQg5nrKxRrPyuIudn93F0ilU xr7gvfQ/0CgO3WwdLQ0wXuaDMJCtOp9nATXbbwxWuoH0omfnDm2D7ko6sOp5bettvNO4 LhWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Rak2jXyVCxsu9w36iXtNJY2CyxL6z5W907r16DRdiwI=; b=MFvQyhnn9Ya3y4OOqxRhGS/r25e35YtV9cuZ6ReEAjhmLXd7R6/t6tS8RynQF7r8Js 5QF2cni+I8hoVtWRT1hMWStAHqwsDVj4cDzA/1rbTloM4e6m0WmVSQwaozmKHnH1G5aW 7pHL5AbA9KGOMZ9arZVtwZ7OqEIR0QBSvkeO19nrf+fltIsNsQxHBQWqt8nYgk8uexgg o1L/NkKoQ8Ml+BfIH1tFQHBA1yLdhfCXj4ctMuOQLF+SwUd2nn4zVmiUQ+YYhOE7j3BD TG0WyGcmAIYBzfuXuWNzVDPi0RvvrteB0tHaKu5DVRYv6ehaaFPBJatOax/OftOwLXoU wgnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1iVXHEYeeY95bjV0Oe8/jBBhB4znvZO2YeCCqOf1O/6XmdgmTl qUoeBB0BgzVAozP2ovZvgmA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7rH16sORrYUdovJN8ltutGjWM1TqM0J/X0Vt6B0RjtC0AlAtQyoO0LT81uFeRNEmMZRtvaYQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3247:b0:4a2:8dc4:3889 with SMTP id c7-20020a056512324700b004a28dc43889mr3983880lfr.410.1666023419345; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobilestation ([95.79.133.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w6-20020a05651204c600b0049ae3ed42e8sm1482468lfq.180.2022.10.17.09.16.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:16:56 +0300 From: Serge Semin To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Serge Semin , Jens Axboe , Keith Busch , Jens Axboe , Sagi Grimberg , Guenter Roeck , Alexey Malahov , Pavel Parkhomenko , Thomas Bogendoerfer , linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] nvme-hwmon: Kmalloc the NVME SMART log buffer Message-ID: <20221017161656.hzmsgqpuvqpmriqs@mobilestation> References: <20220929224648.8997-1-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> <20220929224648.8997-3-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> <20221017071832.GB30661@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221017071832.GB30661@lst.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org Hello Christoph On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 09:18:32AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Thanks, > > applied to nvme-6.1. Please note the applied patch doesn't comply with the Keith' notes Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/YzxueNRODpry8L0%2F@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com/ Meanwhile without patch #1 (having only the accepted by you patch applied) the NVME hwmon init now seems contradicting: it ignores one kmalloc failure (returns zero) but fails on another one (returns -ENOMEM). I asked you to have a look at the patches #1 and #2 of the series Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/20221007100134.faaekmuqyd5vy34m@mobilestation/ and give your opinion whether the re-spin was required: take the Keith' notes or keep the patches as is. Could you please clarify the situation? -Sergey