From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com (e34.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.152]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 116871A038E for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 04:41:59 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost by e34.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 10:41:57 -0700 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC753E4003F for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 10:41:54 -0700 (MST) Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (d01av05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.195]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id u19Hfr6G34275410 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 17:41:53 GMT Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d01av05.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id u19HceuP008829 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 12:38:40 -0500 Reply-To: manoj@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] ibmvscsi: Add and use enums for valid CRQ header values References: <1454542114-1797-1-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1454542114-1797-3-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <56B3ACC9.60009@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <56B3C1C1.3080804@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Tyrel Datwyler , JBottomley@odin.com Cc: martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hare@suse.de, brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com, nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org From: Manoj Kumar Message-ID: <56BA24E1.9090808@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:41:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56B3C1C1.3080804@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Yeah, I can see how that is confusing. Since, all three possible valid > crq message types have the first bit set I think this was originally a > cute hack to grab anything that was likely valid. Then in > ibmvscsi_handle_crq() we explicitly match the full header value in a > switch statement logging anything that turned out actually invalid. > >> >> If 'valid' will only have one of these four enums defined, would >> this be better written as: >> >> if (crq->valid != VIOSRP_CRQ_FREE) > > This definitely would make the logic easier to read and follow. Also, > this would make sure any crq with an invalid header that doesn't have > its first bit set will also be logged by the ibmvscsi_handle_crq() > switch statement default block and not silently ignored. > > -Tyrel Sounds good, Tyrel. Does this mean I should expect a v2 of this patch series? - Manoj N. Kumar