On Sat, 2011-07-16 at 12:57 +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christoph Hellwig [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 10:05 PM
> > To: KY Srinivasan
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]; Haiyang Zhang
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 097/117] Staging: hv: storvsc: Add code to handle IDE
> > devices
> > using the storvsc driver
> >
> > Thanks, this looks much cleaner than the initial variant.
> >
> > > + if (dev_is_ide) {
> > > + storvsc_get_ide_info(device, &target, &path);
> > > + host_dev->path = device_info.path_id;
> > > + host_dev->target = device_info.target_id;
> > > + } else {
> > > + host_dev->path = device_info.path_id;
> > > + host_dev->target = device_info.target_id;
> > > + }
> >
> > Is using the device_info values in both branches intentional? If so
> > there's no need to have these assignments duplicated.
>
> While we set the values in both the branches, the value set is different;
> The IDE side encodes the bits differently and is appropriately parsed in the
> function storvsc_get_ide_info().
Is think that what Christoph meant was simplifying it to:
if (dev_is_ide)
storvsc_get_ide_info(device, &target, &path);
host_dev->path = device_info.path_id;
host_dev->target = device_info.target_id;
--
Sasha.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
