RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] scsi: ufs: core: Remove unnecessary if statement

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Bean Huo,

I think ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun() is also used for wb_buf_alloc_units_show() in ufs-sysfs.c.
So just removing this if-checkup will make different result when check lun value.

Thanks,
Daejun

>From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>LUs with WB potential support are properly checked in ufshcd_wb_probe()
>before calling ufshcd_read_unit_desc_param(), so remove this unnecessary
>if-checkup in ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun() to match its function definition.
>
>Signed-off-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 3 ---
> 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
>index f68ca33f6ac7..2457b005101a 100644
>--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
>+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
>@@ -300,9 +300,6 @@ static inline bool ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun(struct ufs_dev_info *dev_info,
>                 pr_err("Max General LU supported by UFS isn't initialized\n");
>                 return false;
>         }
>-        /* WB is available only for the logical unit from 0 to 7 */
>-        if (param_offset == UNIT_DESC_PARAM_WB_BUF_ALLOC_UNITS)
>-                return lun < UFS_UPIU_MAX_WB_LUN_ID;
>         return lun == UFS_UPIU_RPMB_WLUN || (lun < dev_info->max_lu_supported);
> }
> 
>-- 
>2.34.1




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux