On Thu, Nov 08 2007 at 15:03 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <tomof@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 11:24:36 +0200 > Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c >>>> index 18343a6..28cf6fe 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c >>>> @@ -448,9 +448,6 @@ static int sd_prep_fn(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq) >>>> } else if (rq_data_dir(rq) == READ) { >>>> SCpnt->cmnd[0] = READ_6; >>>> SCpnt->sc_data_direction = DMA_FROM_DEVICE; >>>> - } else { >>>> - scmd_printk(KERN_ERR, SCpnt, "Unknown command %x\n", rq->cmd_flags); >>>> - goto out; >>> This should go to the bidi patch? >>> >>>> } >>>> >> This is just a dead code cleanup. It is got nothing to do with bidi or scsi_data_buffer >> for that matter. It could be in it's own patch, but surly it will not go into the bidi >> patch. I will submit a new patch just for that code. Independent of these. >> (I was hoping to save the extra effort) > > Hm, is it dead code? I think it's kinda BUG_ON, that is, we should not > hit that code. sd only accetps READ and WRITE requests. It prevents > funcy requests like BIDI from accidentally comming. It is dead code. The rq_data_dir(rq) does a (->flags & 0x1) inline the compiler will remove the extra code. Also with bidi rq_data_dir(rq) is decided to return WRITE, a bidi request is blk_bidi_rq(rq). (I have separated this to a patch of it's own.) Boaz - 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