Messages in this thread | | | From | "S, Venkatraman" <> | Date | Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:39:45 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND 2/2] scsi/ufs: Fix evaluation of task_failed status |
| |
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 4:26 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > Please cc James and linux-scsi on drivers/scsi patches? > > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:08:53 +0530 > Venkatraman S <svenkatr@ti.com> wrote: > >> Else FAILED would be set even if task_result was >> originally equal to UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_SUCCEEDED. > > This changelog is inadequate. It failed to describe the end-user > impact of the bug. Without this information we cannot decide which > kernel version(s) should be patched. Please always fully describe a > bug when fixing it. > >> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >> @@ -1160,7 +1160,7 @@ static int ufshcd_task_req_compl(struct ufs_hba *hba, u32 index) >> task_result = be32_to_cpu(task_rsp_upiup->header.dword_1); >> task_result = ((task_result & MASK_TASK_RESPONSE) >> 8); >> >> - if (task_result != UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_COMPL || >> + if (task_result != UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_COMPL && >> task_result != UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_SUCCEEDED) >> task_result = FAILED; >> } else { > > And the title of the patch is poor. There is no "task_failed" here. > Something like "fix evaluation of task completion code" would be > better?
Ok. I will send an updated version of the patch. Regards, Venkat. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |