Re: [PATCH v2 18/21] ata: libata-sata: Improve ata_sas_slave_configure()

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

 



On 9/12/23 16:43, John Garry wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 01:56, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> Change ata_sas_slave_configure() to return the return value of
>> ata_scsi_dev_config() to ensure that any error from that function is
>> propagated to libsas.
> 
> This seems reasonable, but does libsas even check the return code? From 
> a glance, I don't think that it does...

Indeed it does not. This functions still always return 0 at present, so not a
big deal. But for consistency , I will add the check in libsas.

> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
>> ---
>>   drivers/ata/libata-sata.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c b/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
>> index 5d31c08be013..0748e9ea4f5f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-sata.c
>> @@ -1169,8 +1169,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_tport_delete);
>>   int ata_sas_slave_configure(struct scsi_device *sdev, struct ata_port *ap)
>>   {
>>   	ata_scsi_sdev_config(sdev);
>> -	ata_scsi_dev_config(sdev, ap->link.device);
>> -	return 0;
>> +
>> +	return ata_scsi_dev_config(sdev, ap->link.device);
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ata_sas_slave_configure);
>>   
> 

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research




[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