On 12/01/14 10:03, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 10:58:58AM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
if (disable_syn_offset_one_fix) {
- scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~MSG_SIMPLE_TAG;
+ scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~SIMPLE_QUEUE_TAG;
scsiq->q2.tag_code |= (ASC_TAG_FLAG_DISABLE_ASYN_USE_SYN_FIX |
ASC_TAG_FLAG_DISABLE_DISCONNECT);
} else {
One of the statements in advansys.c (tag_code &= 0xDC) makes assumptions
about the numeric value of MSG_SIMPLE_TAG. This makes me wonder whether it
is safe to change MSG_SIMPLE_TAG into another value ?
MSG_SIMPLE_TAG and SIMPLE_QUEUE_TAG are two different symbolic names
for the 0x20 value assigned to the SCSI-2 protocol "SIMPLE QUEUE TAG"
message. Having both is confusing, so I decided to only keep the one
that is named closer to the spec, and in the same namespace as the
symbolic names we use for other SCSI-2 messages.
Thanks for the clarification. Using different namespaces for symbolic
constants for initiator and target drivers definitely looks like a good
idea to me. The patch itself also looks fine to me. Hence:
Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
