From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata-eh don't waste time retrying media errors (v3) Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 12:46:03 -0700 Message-ID: <20120502194603.GB6411@google.com> References: <4FA043BE.2010009@teksavvy.com> <4FA04714.7050602@teksavvy.com> <20120501215854.GA21677@google.com> <4FA07655.6090506@teksavvy.com> <4FA07932.2090003@teksavvy.com> <4FA0A3F7.7000401@teksavvy.com> <20120502155414.GB21677@google.com> <4FA1898C.5070108@teksavvy.com> <20120502193343.GA6411@google.com> <4FA18E49.3040103@teksavvy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:37587 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756209Ab2EBTqJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 May 2012 15:46:09 -0400 Received: by pbbrp8 with SMTP id rp8so1512434pbb.19 for ; Wed, 02 May 2012 12:46:09 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FA18E49.3040103@teksavvy.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: IDE/ATA development list On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 03:43:05PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote: > >> +static inline int ata_eh_worth_retry(struct ata_queued_cmd *qc) > > > > Return bool? && maybe split the patch into two - the first separating > > out the logic into a function, the latter changing emedia handling? > > I think the two-liner from v2 is better. Heh, I don't know. It probably doesn't matter all that much either way. Let's let Jeff decide. ;) Thanks. -- tejun