On 01/05/2010 05:20 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>
>> Embedding scsi_end_request() into scsi_io_completion actually simplifies
>> the code and makes it clearer what's going on.
>>
>> There is absolutely no functional and/or side effects changes after this
>> patch.
>
> Here are some suggestions for changes to the comments. These are quite
> minor and you might not want to bother updating the patch yet again...
>
Sure, NP. thanks for checking me out, coming from Hebrew I do need support
in these matters. Will update tomorrow.
Alan can I add your Review-by: this time around?
>> + if (likely(0 == blk_end_request(req, error, good_bytes))) {
>> + /* All is done and good move to next command */
>
> /* The command completed successfully; move on to the next. */
>
>> + cmd->request = NULL;
>> + action = ACTION_NEXT_CMND;
>> + } else if (result == 0) {
>> + /* Wrote some bytes but request was split */
>
> /* The command was successful but not all the data was
> * transferred; re-prep the command to handle the rest.
> */
>
>> + action = ACTION_REPREP;
>> + } else if (error && scsi_noretry_cmd(cmd)) {
>> + /* kill remainder if no retries */
>
> /* Error. Kill the request since retries are disallowed. */
>
>> + blk_end_request_all(req, error);
>> + cmd->request = NULL;
>> + action = ACTION_NEXT_CMND;
>> + } else if (host_byte(result) == DID_RESET) {
>
> Alan Stern
>
Thanks
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
