From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH git latest] drivers/scsi: fixing wrong comment before new_buffer_tape() Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:20:56 -0700 Message-ID: <1222446056.3971.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080925174948.GA14180@carmen.cs.uiuc.edu> <20080926111300.1dd34009@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <7fcc02550809260905oa17880fi80c94eaacb33dba3@mail.gmail.com> <20080926170937.2983fc29@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:52713 "EHLO accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752103AbYIZQVV (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:21:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080926170937.2983fc29@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Kai Makisara On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 17:09 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > Looks true to me for the current versions of the code. In fact it is only > > > ever called from the initialisation function that I can see so chunks of > > > the code could simply go away as well as bits of the comment. Ditto the > > > one in drivers/scsi/st.c > > > > > > Acked-by: Alan Cox > > > > > > > I am sorry I didn't quite understand. You mean it is true that caller > > must hold os_scsi_tapes_lock? > > Sorry - I mean what you claim is true - that the comment is incorrect. So, I think I'm missing a piece of this: There's no patch in this thread (I presume it's lurking somewhere on lkml). Could someone repost the proposed patch and copy the tape maintainer: Kai Makisara to get his input? Thanks, James