From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 08:35:22 +0100 Message-ID: <20151203073522.GA12920@lst.de> References: <20151202161936.22b23668cf9dea9872b5079b@kernel.org> <20151202164527.GA31048@lst.de> <565F5D96.5050902@kernel.dk> <20151202211400.GB31364@localhost.localdomain> <565F624C.9090301@kernel.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:33365 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750858AbbLCHfY (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 02:35:24 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <565F624C.9090301@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jens Axboe Cc: Keith Busch , Christoph Hellwig , Mark Brown , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 02:27:40PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 12/02/2015 02:14 PM, Keith Busch wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 02:07:34PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Christoph, for-4.5/nvme also fails if integrity isn't enabled: >> >> I forgot about this since I've merged this in my repo to fix: >> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/26/546 >> >> That ok, or should we handle this differently? > > I think that should make it compile, but the behavior will be a bit odd. If > you pass in meta and integrity isn't enabled, you'll get an ENOMEM error. > That seems a bit nonsensical. > > We could make bio_integrity_alloc() return an error pointer. That way we > could retain the ifdefs in the bip code, and not let it spread to drivers. This looks reasonable to me.