Re: [PATCH 2/2] block,scsi: convert and handle ERR_PTR from blk_get_request

[Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>]

Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@stratus.com> writes:

>> ITYM ret = PTR_ERR(next_rq), right?
>
> Oops, you are right of course.  I can include this change if there should be another version (Jens?)
>
>> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_hp_sw.c b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_hp_sw.c
>> > index 084062b..1cf4019 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_hp_sw.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/device_handler/scsi_dh_hp_sw.c
>> > @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static int hp_sw_tur(struct scsi_device *sdev, struct hp_sw_dh_data *h)
>> >  
>> >  retry:
>> >  	req = blk_get_request(sdev->request_queue, WRITE, GFP_NOIO);
>> > -	if (!req)
>> > +	if (IS_ERR(req))
>> >  		return SCSI_DH_RES_TEMP_UNAVAIL;
>> >  
>> 
>> Don't we have an opportunity here to differentiate between enomem and
>> eio?  I have no idea what the right SCSI_DH error would be, I'm just
>> asking the question.

> This sounded familiar, so I dug through my mailbox and found the
> following patch.  When the blk_get_request patches stalled, I stopped
> working on the scsi_dh patch.  But I think you would be talking about
> the introduction of something like "errno_to_SCSI_DH" below...

Wow, that's a lot more churn than I expected.  ;-) I think you should go
ahead and repost this patch with the change mentioned above (you can add
my reviewed-by), and we can revisit this scsi one separately if people
are interested.

Thanks!
Jeff