On 13/08/07, James Smart <James.Smart@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ok.... here's what happened, > > - We changed the define so that it matched what we are using. We never configure > more than 4 HBQ, thus the index will never be beyond 0-3. The if-check is actually > innoculous. Given that the change wasn't your patch, we didn't include you as > the author. > And that's not a problem. I only mentioned it to explain how I searched for the patch before I resend it. > - Coding-wise, you are right, we still didn't fix the range check. > > Since this really is just something to keep the tools happy - I'll recind the NACK. > I'll worry about simply removing this if-check later... > > James/Andrew, accept this patch - ACK. > -- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
