From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756251AbYBIICt (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Feb 2008 03:02:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752181AbYBIICk (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Feb 2008 03:02:40 -0500 Received: from web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.207.64]:28054 "HELO web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752101AbYBIICi (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Feb 2008 03:02:38 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=k1AXJz0Xi7XmOwsz60LFtexSu5DnYvoeg2Unl0GB3rqMiPyVRalMKf0yyqvPXX/iym8+rHa0vjf/yBZp6LARQl4/B6tjiXHRNGUTHvOi8AY2XNLikxj1qoQvl+qPTAgUtFN9wjHzMxdhIrZZ+F1BWSBSl/K2neOOtbDGgO1FzdY=; X-YMail-OSG: h5L3TT8VM1l_ZaVf77AcezZYa2TcZ2IZEc9G0fDCAf1f8RguB0KPNknPqSNVSenGyOSlmQ-- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.162 Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 00:02:33 -0800 (PST) From: Luben Tuikov Reply-To: ltuikov@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_error: Fix language abuse. To: James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <20080208153217.5fc42a50@core> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <949768.13992.qm@web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- On Fri, 2/8/08, Alan Cox wrote: > The word "illegal" has a precise dictionary > meaning of "prohibited by > law". The error messages are therefore incorrect as so > far nobody has > made SCSI violations a criminal offence. > > This corrects scsi to match various other subsystems > I've slowly been > ridding of this. > > Pedantically-signed-off-by: Alan Cox > Alan, In standards and in hardware specs, from which the meaning of "illegal" is borrowed from (into standards), "illegal" doesn't necessarily mean "invalid", and cannot be substituted for. This is exactly why this particular word is used in the ASC/ASCQ assignments. It exposes an underlying behaviour. For example: > - {0x2004, "Illegal command while in write capable state"}, > + {0x2004, "Invalid command while in write capable state"}, Consider this: the command itself can be very perfectly "valid", e.g. the SCB contents, format, etc., but certainly "illegal". Similarly for the rest of this patch. Luben