On Thu, 2019-01-17 at 18:00 -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote: +AD4 A reason from CH about why he did that would be useful. There is an instance +AD4 of struct scsi+AF8-data+AF8-buffer already in a scsi+AF8-cmnd object (called sdb), so +AD4 why not use it and keep the scsi+AF8-cmnd object +ACI-clean+ACI ?? +AD4 +AD4 There should be a coding rule: if you abuse a structure (i.e. blasting another +AD4 object over what the type system is indicating in a obscure fashion) then that +AD4 must be noted in a comment including a rationale. This is such a case. My guess is that the current state of the code is the result of an oversight. Bart.
