Return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and blk_status_t from blk_cloned_rq_check_limits()

Return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and blk_status_t from blk_cloned_rq_check_limits()

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi,
These patches address the comments from previous v1 version
block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported

Updates since v1:
- Document scenario and SCSI error encountered in a comment in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
- Add a patch to switch returning errno codes to blk_status_t in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().

Please review the following patches.
[PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
[PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported

Thanks,
Ritika

[PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Replace returning legacy errno codes with blk_status_t in
blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().

Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
---
 block/blk-core.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 9bfaee0..d241ab8 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1220,14 +1220,14 @@ blk_qc_t submit_bio(struct bio *bio)
  *    limits when retrying requests on other queues. Those requests need
  *    to be checked against the new queue limits again during dispatch.
  */
-static int blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
+static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 				      struct request *rq)
 {
 	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
 			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
 			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
-		return -EIO;
+		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -1240,10 +1240,10 @@ static int blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 	if (rq->nr_phys_segments > queue_max_segments(q)) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max segments limit. (%hu > %hu)\n",
 			__func__, rq->nr_phys_segments, queue_max_segments(q));
-		return -EIO;
+		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
-	return 0;
+	return BLK_STS_OK;
 }
 
 /**
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 03:47:57PM -0700, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
> Replace returning legacy errno codes with blk_status_t in
> blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>

Looks good,

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi Jens,

Can the following patches please be applied.

[PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
[PATCH v4 2/2] block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 13, 2020, at 11:26 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 03:47:57PM -0700, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
>> Replace returning legacy errno codes with blk_status_t in
>> blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
> 
> Looks good,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Jens Axboe]

On 8/26/20 11:03 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Can the following patches please be applied.
> 
> [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
> [PATCH v4 2/2] block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits

Can you resend them against the current tree? They don't apply.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Sure, Will resend them.

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 26, 2020, at 10:19 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> 
> On 8/26/20 11:03 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>> 
>> Can the following patches please be applied.
>> 
>> [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
>> [PATCH v4 2/2] block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
> 
> Can you resend them against the current tree? They don't apply.
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi Jens,

The two patches apply on branch block-5.9 in linux-block.git

I apply the patches using git am xxx.patch.

$ git log --oneline --decorate -n 5
4d8e990 (HEAD, block59) block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
9a8a3d4 block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
a433d72 (origin/block-5.9) Merge branch 'md-fixes' of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/song/md into block-5.9
6af10a3 md/raid5: make sure stripe_size as power of two
79e5dc5 loop: Set correct device size when using LOOP_CONFIGURE

Please let me know if I missed something and should test on another branch?

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 26, 2020, at 10:23 AM, Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Sure, Will resend them.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ritika
> 
>> On Aug 26, 2020, at 10:19 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>> 
>> On 8/26/20 11:03 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>> 
>>> Can the following patches please be applied.
>>> 
>>> [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
>>> [PATCH v4 2/2] block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
>> 
>> Can you resend them against the current tree? They don't apply.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jens Axboe
>> 
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Jens Axboe]

On 8/28/20 9:52 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> The two patches apply on branch block-5.9 in linux-block.git
> 
> I apply the patches using git am xxx.patch.
> 
> $ git log --oneline --decorate -n 5
> 4d8e990 (HEAD, block59) block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
> 9a8a3d4 block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
> a433d72 (origin/block-5.9) Merge branch 'md-fixes' of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/song/md into block-5.9
> 6af10a3 md/raid5: make sure stripe_size as power of two
> 79e5dc5 loop: Set correct device size when using LOOP_CONFIGURE
> 
> Please let me know if I missed something and should test on another branch?

It doesn't on my 5.10 branch, but I haven't pushed that out yet so can't
really fault you for that. I'll get to it in the next day or so.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Thanks Jens for the update.
I will look out for 5.10 branch and send the updated patches.

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 28, 2020, at 8:52 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> 
> On 8/28/20 9:52 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>> 
>> The two patches apply on branch block-5.9 in linux-block.git
>> 
>> I apply the patches using git am xxx.patch.
>> 
>> $ git log --oneline --decorate -n 5
>> 4d8e990 (HEAD, block59) block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
>> 9a8a3d4 block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
>> a433d72 (origin/block-5.9) Merge branch 'md-fixes' of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/song/md into block-5.9
>> 6af10a3 md/raid5: make sure stripe_size as power of two
>> 79e5dc5 loop: Set correct device size when using LOOP_CONFIGURE
>> 
>> Please let me know if I missed something and should test on another branch?
> 
> It doesn't on my 5.10 branch, but I haven't pushed that out yet so can't
> really fault you for that. I'll get to it in the next day or so.
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Jens Axboe]

On 8/28/20 11:10 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
> Thanks Jens for the update.
> I will look out for 5.10 branch and send the updated patches.

I pushed it out this morning.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Thanks Jens for the update.
I will send the patches on top of 5.10 branch.

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 31, 2020, at 8:38 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> 
> On 8/28/20 11:10 AM, Ritika Srivastava wrote:
>> Thanks Jens for the update.
>> I will look out for 5.10 branch and send the updated patches.
> 
> I pushed it out this morning.
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
> 

[PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported

[Ritika Srivastava]

If WRITE_ZERO/WRITE_SAME operation is not supported by the storage,
blk_cloned_rq_check_limits() will return IO error which will cause
device-mapper to fail the paths.

Instead, if the queue limit is set to 0, return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP.
BLK_STS_NOTSUPP will be ignored by device-mapper and will not fail the
paths.

Suggested-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
---
 block/blk-core.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index d241ab8..a6ebfeb 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1223,10 +1223,24 @@ blk_qc_t submit_bio(struct bio *bio)
 static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 				      struct request *rq)
 {
-	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
+	unsigned int queue_max_sector = blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq));
+
+	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > queue_max_sector) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
-			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
-			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
+			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq), queue_max_sector);
+
+		/* If storage does not support the operation,
+		 * the following SCSI error will be returned.
+		 * Illegal Request
+		 * Invalid command operation code
+		 *
+		 * In turn device will set the corresponding queue limit to 0.
+		 *
+		 * If limit is 0, do not return IO error,
+		 * instead return operation not supported.
+		 */
+		if (queue_max_sector == 0)
+			return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;
 		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
@@ -1253,8 +1267,10 @@ static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
  */
 blk_status_t blk_insert_cloned_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
 {
-	if (blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq))
-		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
+	blk_status_t cloned_limit_check = blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq);
+
+	if (cloned_limit_check != BLK_STS_OK)
+		return cloned_limit_check;
 
 	if (rq->rq_disk &&
 	    should_fail_request(&rq->rq_disk->part0, blk_rq_bytes(rq)))
-- 
1.8.3.1

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported

[Christoph Hellwig]

The concept looks fine, but some of the formatting especially in the
comments is strange.  Also we should not print the message for this
case, but just the real error.  Updated version with my suggestions
below.

Also don't you need a third patch that makes dm-multipath stop sending
Write Same/Zeroes command when this happens?

---
From c056b0523173f17cd3d8ca77a8cfca4e45fe8cb7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:47:58 -0700
Subject: block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in
 blk_cloned_rq_check_limits

If WRITE_ZERO/WRITE_SAME operation is not supported by the storage,
blk_cloned_rq_check_limits() will return IO error which will cause
device-mapper to fail the paths.

Instead, if the queue limit is set to 0, return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP.
BLK_STS_NOTSUPP will be ignored by device-mapper and will not fail the
paths.

Suggested-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
---
 block/blk-core.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index e04ee2c8da2e95..81b830c24b5b4f 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1296,10 +1296,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio);
 static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 				      struct request *rq)
 {
-	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
+	unsigned int max_sectors = blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq));
+
+	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > max_sectors) {
+		/*
+		 * At least SCSI device do not have a good way to return if
+		 * Write Same is actually supported.  So we first try to issue
+		 * one and if it fails clear the max sectors value on failure.
+		 * If this occurs onthe lower device we need to propagate the
+		 * right error code up.
+		 */
+		if (max_sectors == 0)
+			return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;
+
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
-			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
-			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
+			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq), max_sectors);
 		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
@@ -1326,8 +1337,11 @@ static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
  */
 blk_status_t blk_insert_cloned_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
 {
-	if (blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq))
-		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
+	blk_status_t ret;
+
+	ret = blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq);
+	if (ret != BLK_STS_OK)
+		return ret;
 
 	if (rq->rq_disk &&
 	    should_fail_request(&rq->rq_disk->part0, blk_rq_bytes(rq)))
-- 
2.28.0

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi Christoph,

Thank you for the review.

> On Aug 13, 2020, at 11:37 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> The concept looks fine, but some of the formatting especially in the
> comments is strange.  Also we should not print the message for this
> case, but just the real error.  Updated version with my suggestions
> below.

Your suggestions look good to me.
I will include these changes in updated patch and send it for review.

> 
> Also don't you need a third patch that makes dm-multipath stop sending
> Write Same/Zeroes command when this happens?

blk-lib takes care of not sending any further Write Zero/Same in blkdev_issue_zeroout().
If max_write_zeroes_sectors is set to 0 later on, no more Write Zero/Same will be sent.
> 
> ---
> From c056b0523173f17cd3d8ca77a8cfca4e45fe8cb7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:47:58 -0700
> Subject: block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in
> blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
> 
> If WRITE_ZERO/WRITE_SAME operation is not supported by the storage,
> blk_cloned_rq_check_limits() will return IO error which will cause
> device-mapper to fail the paths.
> 
> Instead, if the queue limit is set to 0, return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP.
> BLK_STS_NOTSUPP will be ignored by device-mapper and will not fail the
> paths.
> 
> Suggested-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
> ---
> block/blk-core.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index e04ee2c8da2e95..81b830c24b5b4f 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -1296,10 +1296,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(submit_bio);
> static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
> 				      struct request *rq)
> {
> -	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
> +	unsigned int max_sectors = blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq));
> +
> +	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > max_sectors) {
> +		/*
> +		 * At least SCSI device do not have a good way to return if
> +		 * Write Same is actually supported.  So we first try to issue
> +		 * one and if it fails clear the max sectors value on failure.
> +		 * If this occurs onthe lower device we need to propagate the
> +		 * right error code up.
> +		 */
> +		if (max_sectors == 0)
> +			return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;
> +
> 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
> -			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
> -			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
> +			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq), max_sectors);
> 		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
> 	}
> 
> @@ -1326,8 +1337,11 @@ static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
>  */
> blk_status_t blk_insert_cloned_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> {
> -	if (blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq))
> -		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
> +	blk_status_t ret;
> +
> +	ret = blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(q, rq);
> +	if (ret != BLK_STS_OK)
> +		return ret;
> 
> 	if (rq->rq_disk &&
> 	    should_fail_request(&rq->rq_disk->part0, blk_rq_bytes(rq)))
> -- 
> 2.28.0
> 

Re: Return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and blk_status_t from blk_cloned_rq_check_limits()

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi,

Gentle ping
Please help review these.

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Jul 29, 2020, at 3:47 PM, Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> These patches address the comments from previous v1 version
> block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported
> 
> Updates since v1:
> - Document scenario and SCSI error encountered in a comment in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
> - Add a patch to switch returning errno codes to blk_status_t in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
> 
> Please review the following patches.
> [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
> [PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported
> 
> Thanks,
> Ritika

Re: Return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and blk_status_t from blk_cloned_rq_check_limits()

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi,

Ping..
Please help review these patches.

Thanks,
Ritika

> On Aug 5, 2020, at 10:54 AM, Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Gentle ping
> Please help review these.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ritika
> 
>> On Jul 29, 2020, at 3:47 PM, Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> These patches address the comments from previous v1 version
>> block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported
>> 
>> Updates since v1:
>> - Document scenario and SCSI error encountered in a comment in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
>> - Add a patch to switch returning errno codes to blk_status_t in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().
>> 
>> Please review the following patches.
>> [PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
>> [PATCH v2 2/2] block: return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP if operation is not supported
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Ritika
> 

Return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP and blk_status_t from blk_cloned_rq_check_limits()

[Ritika Srivastava]

Hi Jens,

I applied the following patches on 5.10 branch and there are only line number changes.

[PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
[PATCH v4 2/2] block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits

I am resending the patches applied on top of 5.10 branch.

$ git log --oneline --decorate -n 5
5749f24 (HEAD, for-5.10/block) block: better deal with the delayed not supported case in blk_cloned_rq_check_limits
bb79f6e block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes
9493111 (origin/for-5.10/block) block: remove the unused q argument to part_in_flight and part_in_flight_rw
8eeee76 block: remove the disk argument to delete_partition
7f201bc block: cleanup __alloc_disk_node

Thanks,
Ritika

[PATCH 1/2] block: Return blk_status_t instead of errno codes

[Ritika Srivastava]

Replace returning legacy errno codes with blk_status_t in
blk_cloned_rq_check_limits().

Signed-off-by: Ritika Srivastava <ritika.srivastava@oracle.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
---
 block/blk-core.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 1028c34..4c1af34 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1144,14 +1144,14 @@ blk_qc_t submit_bio(struct bio *bio)
  *    limits when retrying requests on other queues. Those requests need
  *    to be checked against the new queue limits again during dispatch.
  */
-static int blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
+static blk_status_t blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 				      struct request *rq)
 {
 	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq) > blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq))) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max size limit. (%u > %u)\n",
 			__func__, blk_rq_sectors(rq),
 			blk_queue_get_max_sectors(q, req_op(rq)));
-		return -EIO;
+		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -1164,10 +1164,10 @@ static int blk_cloned_rq_check_limits(struct request_queue *q,
 	if (rq->nr_phys_segments > queue_max_segments(q)) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: over max segments limit. (%hu > %hu)\n",
 			__func__, rq->nr_phys_segments, queue_max_segments(q));
-		return -EIO;
+		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
 	}
 
-	return 0;
+	return BLK_STS_OK;
 }
 
 /**
-- 
1.8.3.1