From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Reinecke Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] ata: add ata_is_fpdma() accessor Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:01:46 +0200 Message-ID: <5787B76A.7020500@suse.de> References: <1468454751-12466-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1468454751-12466-5-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20160714143756.GF15005@htj.duckdns.org> <5787ACA7.9050808@suse.com> <20160714151913.GL15005@htj.duckdns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51674 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751115AbcGNQBw (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jul 2016 12:01:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160714151913.GL15005@htj.duckdns.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo , Hannes Reinecke Cc: Christoph Hellwig , damien.lemoal@hgst.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On 07/14/2016 05:19 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Hannes. >=20 > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 05:15:51PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >>>> +static inline bool ata_is_fpdma(u8 prot) >>>> +{ >>>> + return ata_prot_flags(prot) & ATA_PROT_FLAG_FPDMA; >>>> +} >>> >>> ??? >>> >> Yeah, strictly speaking there is no need for ATA_PROT_FLAG_FPDMA. >> I'll be removing it if you insist. >=20 > No, it's just really confusing to have a function named ata_is_fpdma(= ) > and then have it test whether the protocol is NCQ or DMA. If you > wanna do that, name it ata_is_dma_or_fpdma(). ata_is_fpdma() should > test (prot & ATA_PROT_FLAG_FPDMA) =3D=3D ATA_PROT_FLAG_FPDMA. >=20 Ah. Now I see your point. That was unintentional, and your suggestion is in fact correct. I'll be fixing it up. Cheers, Hannes --=20 Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imend=F6rffer, HRB 16746 (AG N=FCrnberg)