From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kei Tokunaga Subject: Re: [PATCH] lpfc: fix the max value of lpfc_log_verbose Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:09:52 +0900 Message-ID: <4B68F710.7070509@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <4B666AC4.10109@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B66D89D.8060505@emulex.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:45795 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751538Ab0BCEKV (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2010 23:10:21 -0500 Received: from m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.73]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o134AJO7010085 for (envelope-from tokunaga.keiich@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:10:20 +0900 Received: from smail (m3 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF7E445DE4D for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:10:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.93]) by m3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954A245DE50 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:10:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 777451DB803B for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:10:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from m024.s.css.fujitsu.com (m024.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.0.81.64]) by s3.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A371DB8037 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:10:19 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <4B66D89D.8060505@emulex.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Smart Cc: James Bottomley , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , Kei Tokunaga James Smart wrote: > Nack... I'd rather move it to an unsigned int. In any case, Emulex > will take care of this issue in its next patch series. Sure. That's totally fine with me. Thanks for taking care of this! Kei > -- james s > > > Kei Tokunaga wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The max value of lpfc_log_verbose is intended to be 0xffffffff, but since >> it was treated as int, 0xffffffff was not actually accepted. Correcting >> it to the actual max value (0x7fffffff) (Bits up to 18th are defined and >> bits up to 15th are actually used today.) >> >> This is the message when tried to store 0xffffffff to lpfc_log_verbose. >> >> kernel: lpfc 0000:02:03.0: 0:(0):0424 lpfc_log_verbose attribute >> cannot be set to -1, allowed range is [0x0, 0xffffffff] >> >> Changing its type from 'int' to 'unsigned int' might be another option. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kei Tokunaga >> >> >> --- >> >> linux-2.6.33-rc5-v-kei/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c | 2 +- >> linux-2.6.33-rc5-v-kei/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_logmsg.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff -puN drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c~fix_max_of_log_verbose >> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c >> --- >> linux-2.6.33-rc5-v/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c~fix_max_of_log_verbose >> 2010-01-25 20:23:43.000000000 +0900 >> +++ linux-2.6.33-rc5-v-kei/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_attr.c 2010-01-25 >> 20:24:06.000000000 +0900 >> @@ -2086,7 +2086,7 @@ static DEVICE_ATTR(lpfc_devloss_tmo, S_I >> # You can set a bit mask to record specific types of verbose messages: >> # See lpfc_logmsh.h for definitions. >> */ >> -LPFC_VPORT_ATTR_HEX_RW(log_verbose, 0x0, 0x0, 0xffffffff, >> +LPFC_VPORT_ATTR_HEX_RW(log_verbose, 0x0, 0x0, 0x7fffffff, >> "Verbose logging bit-mask"); >> >> /* >> diff -puN drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_logmsg.h~fix_max_of_log_verbose >> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_logmsg.h >> --- >> linux-2.6.33-rc5-v/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_logmsg.h~fix_max_of_log_verbose >> 2010-01-25 20:24:24.000000000 +0900 >> +++ linux-2.6.33-rc5-v-kei/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_logmsg.h >> 2010-01-25 20:24:55.000000000 +0900 >> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ >> #define LOG_VPORT 0x00004000 /* NPIV events */ >> #define LOF_SECURITY 0x00008000 /* Security events */ >> #define LOG_EVENT 0x00010000 /* CT,TEMP,DUMP, logging */ >> -#define LOG_ALL_MSG 0xffffffff /* LOG all messages */ >> +#define LOG_ALL_MSG 0x7fffffff /* LOG all messages */ >> >> #define lpfc_printf_vlog(vport, level, mask, fmt, arg...) \ >> do { \ >> >> _ >> >> >> >> > >