the recommended version in plain text
---
--- o/linux-2.6.36-rc1/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2010-08-16
08:41:38.000000000 +0800
+++ m/linux-2.6.36-rc1/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2010-09-18
08:59:50.000000000 +0800
@@ -1276,11 +1276,10 @@ static inline int scsi_target_queue_read
}
if (scsi_target_is_busy(starget)) {
- if (list_empty(&sdev->starved_entry)) {
+ if (list_empty(&sdev->starved_entry))
list_add_tail(&sdev->starved_entry,
&shost->starved_list);
- return 0;
- }
+ return 0;
}
/* We're OK to process the command, so we can't be starved */
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Mike Christie <michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 09/14/2010 08:35 AM, Hillf Danton wrote:
>>
>> It seems that zero should be returned if scsi_target_is_busy(starget) is
>> true, no matter if sdev is on the starved list.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton<dhillf@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> --- o/linux-2.6.36-rc1/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2010-08-16
>> 08:41:38.000000000
>> +0800
>> +++ m/linux-2.6.36-rc1/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2010-09-14
>> 21:04:50.000000000
>> +0800
>> @@ -1279,8 +1279,8 @@ static inline int scsi_target_queue_read
>> if (list_empty(&sdev->starved_entry)) {
>> list_add_tail(&sdev->starved_entry,
>> &shost->starved_list);
>> - return 0;
>> }
>
> I think the formatting in the patch got messed up by your mailer. When you
> resend the patch, you can remove the brackets since you removed the return 0
> there is no need for them.
>
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> /* We're OK to process the command, so we can't be starved */
>>
>
> Patch is right. I do not know what I was thinking when I did that.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mike Christie <michaelc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
--
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
