Re: [PATCH 1/1] libata: rearrange dmesg info to add full ATA revision

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Tejun Heo wrote:
> [The previous replay mysteriously didn't include Eric in To:, sorry,
> quoting whole message here.]
> 
> Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello, Eric.
>>
>> Eric D. Mudama wrote:
>>> Per Jeff's suggestion, this patch rearranges the info printed for ATA
>>> drives into dmesg to add the full ATA firmware revision and model
>>> information, while keeping the output to 2 lines.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric D. Mudama <edmudama@gmail.com>
>> The patch is formatted and applies perfectly.  I'm glad to see this
>> change.  Just a few nits below.
>>
>>>  	char revbuf[7];		/* XYZ-99\0 */
>>> +	char fwrevbuf[9];
>>> +	char modelbuf[41];
>> Please use ATA_ID_FW_REV_LEN + 1 and ATA_ID_PROD_LEN + 1.
> 
> This depends on to which version this patch applies.  For
> #upstream-fixes (2.6.20-rc6), you have to use raw numbers as you did.
> For #upstream, there are above two constants to use.  I think this patch
> is good for 2.6.20 as it's safe && will help us analyzing bug reports
> for 2.6.20.  So, ignore this part of the comment.

We have time to revise.  I only want to commit true bug fixes at this 
point, to 2.6.20.

	Jeff