On 12/18/2011 03:53 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 18.12.2011 15:45, schrieb James Bottomley:
>> On Sun, 2011-12-18 at 15:43 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Am 18.11.2011 00:34, schrieb Richard Weinberger:
>>>> scsi_dh_attach() should return a negative value on error.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> include/scsi/scsi_dh.h | 2 +-
>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/scsi/scsi_dh.h b/include/scsi/scsi_dh.h
>>>> index e3f2db2..e07ab10 100644
>>>> --- a/include/scsi/scsi_dh.h
>>>> +++ b/include/scsi/scsi_dh.h
>>>> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static inline int scsi_dh_handler_exist(const char *name)
>>>> }
>>>> static inline int scsi_dh_attach(struct request_queue *req, const char *name)
>>>> {
>>>> - return SCSI_DH_NOSYS;
>>>> + return -SCSI_DH_NOSYS;
>>>> }
>>>> static inline void scsi_dh_detach(struct request_queue *q)
>>>> {
>>>
>>> James,
>>>
>>> can you please pickup this patch?
>>
>> It still needs an ack from rdac people (other one just got overlooked).
>>
>
> Who are the rdac people?
> I sent the patch to all addresses reported by get_maintainers.pl.
>
Nack.
This patch is wrong.
scsi_dh_attach() (and, incidentally, scsi_dh_set_params()) should
return a standard error value. SCSI_DH_XXX are internal to
device_handler and should never see the light of day.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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
