From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: What breaks aic7xxx in post 2.6.12-rc2 ? Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 09:59:11 -0500 Message-ID: <1117465151.4913.5.camel@mulgrave> References: <20050517192636.GB9121@gmail.com> <1116359432.4989.48.camel@mulgrave> <20050517195650.GC9121@gmail.com> <1116363971.4989.51.camel@mulgrave> <20050521232220.GD28654@gmail.com> <1116770040.5002.13.camel@mulgrave> <20050524153930.GA10911@gmail.com> <1117113563.4967.17.camel@mulgrave> <20050526143516.GA9593@gmail.com> <1117118766.4967.22.camel@mulgrave> <20050526173518.GA9132@gmail.com> <1117463938.4913.3.camel@mulgrave> <429B2880.7060608@tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <429B2880.7060608@tls.msk.ru> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Tokarev Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gr=E9goire?= Favre , dino@in.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , SCSI Mailing List List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 18:51 +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Hmm.. Should there be a pair of {}'s somewhere? Only if it were actual code for the tree, rather than a throw away test ... it's a single lun target, so the condition is always true. James