From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kei Tokunaga Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] scsi: add scsi trace core function and put trace points Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:55:25 +0900 Message-ID: <4B690FCD.2040405@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <4B665EC9.6000608@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B666181.7080200@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Martin K. Petersen" Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Frederic Weisbecker , Christoph Hellwig , Joe Perches , Tomohiro Kusumi , lkml , Li Zefan , Xiao Guangrong , Kei Tokunaga List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Martin K. Petersen wrote: >>>>>> "Kei" == Kei Tokunaga writes: > > I'm traveling so I won't have time to look at this closely until next > week. However, this caught my eye: > > +static const char * > +scsi_trace_varlen(struct trace_seq *p, unsigned char *cdb, int len) > +{ > + switch (SERVICE_ACTION(cdb)) { > + case READ_32: > + case WRITE_32: > + /* if protection is enabled */ > + if (((cdb[10] >> 5) & 0x7) == 1) > + return scsi_trace_rw32(p, cdb, len); > + /* fall through */ > + default: > + return scsi_trace_misc(p, cdb, len); > + } > +} > > It is not a requirement that a 32-byte READ/WRITE request must have > PROTECT set. So that if statement is bogus. Yes. I agree that the if statement is not necessary here. I'll fix it. Thanks for having your time for the review. Kei