Heiko Carstens schrieb:
- zfcp_erp_modify_adapter_status(adapter,
+ zfcp_erp_modify_adapter_status(adapter, 24, 0,
ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_OPEN, ZFCP_CLEAR);
}
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ zfcp_erp_adapter_reopen_internal(struct
zfcp_get_busid_by_adapter(adapter));
debug_text_event(adapter->erp_dbf, 5, "a_ro_f");
/* ensure propagation of failed status to new devices */
- zfcp_erp_adapter_failed(adapter);
+ zfcp_erp_adapter_failed(adapter, 13, 0);
24, 13? I bet you made sure that these numbers fit the huge list.. and
hopefully nobody will ever add anything in between.
Why not just pass a string? This looks way too complicated and error-prone.
Well, do you remember the scheme introduced by our (s390) kernel message
catalog? Same approach.
I think numbers are superior. I won't store strings because I want to
keep trace entries as small as possible - 1 or 2 bytes for a number vs.
lots of bytes for a string ... for each event.
Yes, I did this carefully. The strings array helps to keep track of used
IDs.
Regards,
Martin
--
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
