Re: [PATCH] block/elevator: handle possible null pointer

[Jens Axboe]

On 12/21/21 1:10 AM, Peng Hao wrote:
> There is a check for q->tag_set in the front of elevator_get_default,
> and there should be a check here too.

I always get suspicious when I see patches like that. Is the other check
valid? Why does it need to get checked? There's really no meat on the
bone in this commit message.

-- 
Jens Axboe