From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8F72C43381 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 07:09:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F5892087C for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 07:09:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="IE828FMX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726610AbfCNHJB (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Mar 2019 03:09:01 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com ([209.85.210.195]:39222 "EHLO mail-pf1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726582AbfCNHJA (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Mar 2019 03:09:00 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id i20so3220053pfo.6; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:09:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KGpuam99NABsp1VKOu6ZC1oubHxF0HKwvxBpAYD4oq8=; b=IE828FMX4r9uAiRp6rgkeNcBES8jOIY1LpYtmhl5CR0AwDgaqsV5/VzRHazhgzbmrO 0rGqG0gkGCTPEE1Vm7x3+4FNPFmAugljRIscxH4QRxzeRIR80YitC+1QMg2boCThQ1Sl 4h/AeZduNtgMur8/afCPWTO/CvD/rCMcyjMQF0KKXA+YdmndnJh8WASDwluwFFpFDgll 4Sdx22N1UZVh3KasHNj2cUkyOp/D3Lu2mdYvxsB7mwOwMZKFbbJRLKV8OH51Spt3G9Kz 5D+WnHPQPBUfakJgkWNVVgY/Z+uVT9SKXlEcaM90mypxlKxefvtuBcJMKWLKSSGGr2dG TNGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KGpuam99NABsp1VKOu6ZC1oubHxF0HKwvxBpAYD4oq8=; b=RxmxzLBSjznywQuU7sBwV3QEe/cyapNRcAfwAIL+j7UGHGlP/DzcyiN5wDKdwFU5Lz cOOZSFlRlJskBkjfzQLrkG2LJMEbPFhM+mVdS/MTgZqt6cakwEs90duJ39jazaPVBiW0 duhvaiGb7dVGX7ebRP6CFnGvYHoHl2AbjkS972wrbschgbUmbJvKXIcI/iudRwUb2b0N lXV1Fnr9R1D1jDI8jwqsE+RSy6ECUwWVBUkTrFMFmiw+Mqt9X/AZU64uZ0+JJ5FILKbg zYoNoe8UCPVCfs9UWXoT5j7DgaKgmT1y0NJcO4Xoc6ubBrcwriiuVNbRTFMGvBoKzGeS j5fA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUsbe4wiJ1tnV4+DOZGt+duMZ94mAPpaNrAfXHyRDGLKmwBayay C6C5uQmw3ZsqoF26zsGIXdhes5oW X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxZ1OnzbNP62tf1FCtpg1LAn4+AdKYh4CP7Xk7OX81QcMCnVbpvrFdX6yJYv5ijpnGD1E86VA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:6654:: with SMTP id z20mr42955705pgv.390.1552547339982; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([175.223.23.218]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h13sm18707858pfn.114.2019.03.14.00.08.58 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2019 16:08:56 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Steve French Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Steve French , CIFS , samba-technical , LKML , Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cifs: remove unused status severity defines Message-ID: <20190314070856.GA1200@jagdpanzerIV> References: <20190314061716.19892-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-cifs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org On (03/14/19 01:54), Steve French wrote: > Since this file (smb2status.h) is intended to track the official > protocol documentation (albeit smb2status.h probably needs to be > updated), in this case the protocol document MS-ERREF. I would prefer > to keep it closer to MS-ERREF and leave definitions in even if unused > (if nothing else it helps some of us when debugging to recognize what > these errors on the wire mean). There is a real danger that we have > run into in the past that in removing some protocol definitions > (flags, etc.) from the code or forgetting to update our headers to > match newer versions of the protocol specifications, that with future > code changes we can forget to handle flags (for example) or misparse > responses due to not realizing that there are additional flags that > need to be parsed. OK, works for me. -ss