From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753612Ab3KZD33 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:29:29 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58477 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750855Ab3KZD31 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Nov 2013 22:29:27 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 19:30:12 -0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Peng Tao Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, JC Lafoucriere , Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] staging/lustre/mdt: HSM coordinator agent interface Message-ID: <20131126033012.GA30128@kroah.com> References: <1385431510-18988-1-git-send-email-bergwolf@gmail.com> <1385431510-18988-9-git-send-email-bergwolf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1385431510-18988-9-git-send-email-bergwolf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:05:02AM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: > From: JC Lafoucriere > > To move data with external storage, HSM coordinator > uses a Copy Tool running on a client named agent. > This patch implements the interface for these agents. Interesting text here... > Lustre-change: http://review.whamcloud.com/6534 > Intel-bug-id: https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-3342 > Signed-off-by: JC Lafoucriere > Reviewed-by: Jinshan Xiong > Reviewed-by: Andreas Dilger > Reviewed-by: John L. Hammond > Reviewed-by: Oleg Drokin > Signed-off-by: Peng Tao > Signed-off-by: Andreas Dilger > --- > .../lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h > index 9436166..631f026 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre/lustre_user.h > @@ -428,8 +428,8 @@ struct obd_uuid { > char uuid[UUID_MAX]; > }; > > -static inline int obd_uuid_equals(const struct obd_uuid *u1, > - const struct obd_uuid *u2) > +static inline bool obd_uuid_equals(const struct obd_uuid *u1, > + const struct obd_uuid *u2) > { > return strcmp((char *)u1->uuid, (char *)u2->uuid) == 0; > } > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static inline void obd_str2uuid(struct obd_uuid *uuid, const char *tmp) > } > > /* For printf's only, make sure uuid is terminated */ > -static inline char *obd_uuid2str(struct obd_uuid *uuid) > +static inline char *obd_uuid2str(const struct obd_uuid *uuid) > { > if (uuid->uuid[sizeof(*uuid) - 1] != '\0') { > /* Obviously not safe, but for printfs, no real harm done... Too bad it doesn't describe the changes made in the code at all. How can so many people review a patch that is not the same as what it says it really is? I'm stopping here in the series, sorry. Please fix up and resend the rest when you can. greg k-h