>>> Mike Christie <micha...@cs.wisc.edu> schrieb am 28.05.2013 um 10:34 in
Nachricht <51a46c13.3030...@cs.wisc.edu>:
> On 05/28/2013 03:27 AM, Mike Christie wrote:
>> On 04/05/2013 06:34 AM, vikas.chaudh...@qlogic.com wrote:
>>> From: Adheer Chandravanshi <adheer.chandravan...@qlogic.com>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Adheer Chandravanshi <adheer.chandravan...@qlogic.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vikas Chaudhary <vikas.chaudh...@qlogic.com>
>>> ---
>>>  usr/iscsiadm.c | 4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/usr/iscsiadm.c b/usr/iscsiadm.c
>>> index 5a18522..f87f48c 100644
>>> --- a/usr/iscsiadm.c
>>> +++ b/usr/iscsiadm.c
>>> @@ -3016,7 +3016,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
>>>             if (sub_mode != -1) {
>>>                     switch (sub_mode) {
>>>                     case MODE_CHAP:
>>> -                           if (!op || !host_no) {
>>> +                           if (!op || (host_no == 0xffffffff)) {
>>>                                     log_error("CHAP mode requires host "
>>>                                             "no and valid operation");
>>>                                     rc = ISCSI_ERR_INVAL;
>>> @@ -3026,7 +3026,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
>>>                                                    value);
>>>                             break;
>>>                     case MODE_FLASHNODE:
>>> -                           if (!host_no) {
>>> +                           if (host_no == 0xffffffff) {
>>>                                     log_error("FLASHNODE mode requires host 
>>> no");
>>>                                     rc = ISCSI_ERR_INVAL;
>>>                                     break;
>>>
>> 
>> I merged the attached instead. It uses a define instead.
>> 
> 
> Actually, this is wrong. I guess the host no in the kernel is now a
> unsigned int, so 0xffffffff is a valid host no. I think we have to make
> the host no a unin64_t?

Whatever it is or will be: It seems to be a good reason for a macro like 
"#define valid_host_no(h) ((h) != <whatever>)"
I away wonder whether 0xffffffff is "(unsigned) -1". I would avoid concrete 
bits as much as possible...

> 
> Same for flashnode_idx. That should be fixed and the hard coding of the
> max should be replaced with a define instead of hard coding 0xffffffff
> in places like exec_flashnode_op.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "open-iscsi" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"open-iscsi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to open-iscsi+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to open-iscsi@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to