From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] scsi: remove MSG_*_TAG defines Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:58:58 +0100 Message-ID: <54784762.8020304@acm.org> References: <1416839781-26988-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20141124150725.GA23165@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sf1.bxl.stone.is ([87.238.167.36]:41041 "EHLO sf1.bxl.stone.is" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751053AbaK1KrV (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:47:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20141124150725.GA23165@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Cc: Doug Ledford On 11/24/14 16:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > index 6719a33..2c5ce48 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/advansys.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/advansys.c > @@ -7921,9 +7921,9 @@ static int asc_build_req(struct asc_board *boardp, struct scsi_cmnd *scp, > */ > if ((asc_dvc->cur_dvc_qng[scp->device->id] > 0) && > (boardp->reqcnt[scp->device->id] % 255) == 0) { > - asc_scsi_q->q2.tag_code = MSG_ORDERED_TAG; > + asc_scsi_q->q2.tag_code = ORDERED_QUEUE_TAG; > } else { > - asc_scsi_q->q2.tag_code = MSG_SIMPLE_TAG; > + asc_scsi_q->q2.tag_code = SIMPLE_QUEUE_TAG; > } > > /* Build ASC_SCSI_Q */ > @@ -8351,7 +8351,7 @@ static int AscPutReadyQueue(ASC_DVC_VAR *asc_dvc, ASC_SCSI_Q *scsiq, uchar q_no) > } > q_addr = ASC_QNO_TO_QADDR(q_no); > if ((scsiq->q1.target_id & asc_dvc->use_tagged_qng) == 0) { > - scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~MSG_SIMPLE_TAG; > + scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~SIMPLE_QUEUE_TAG; > } > scsiq->q1.status = QS_FREE; > AscMemWordCopyPtrToLram(iop_base, > @@ -8669,7 +8669,7 @@ static int AscExeScsiQueue(ASC_DVC_VAR *asc_dvc, ASC_SCSI_Q *scsiq) > } > } > if (disable_syn_offset_one_fix) { > - scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~MSG_SIMPLE_TAG; > + scsiq->q2.tag_code &= ~SIMPLE_QUEUE_TAG; > scsiq->q2.tag_code |= (ASC_TAG_FLAG_DISABLE_ASYN_USE_SYN_FIX | > ASC_TAG_FLAG_DISABLE_DISCONNECT); > } else { One of the statements in advansys.c (tag_code &= 0xDC) makes assumptions about the numeric value of MSG_SIMPLE_TAG. This makes me wonder whether it is safe to change MSG_SIMPLE_TAG into another value ? Bart.