Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 09/13] scsi: in scsi_prep_fn(), remove bogus comments & clean up
From: James Bottomley (James.Bottomley_at_SteelEye.com)
Date: 03/31/05
- Previous message: Patrick Mochel: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- In reply to: Tejun Heo: "Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 09/13] scsi: in scsi_prep_fn(), remove bogus comments & clean up"
- Next in thread: Tejun Heo: "Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 07/13] scsi: move error handling out of scsi_init_io() into scsi_prep_fn()"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:02:20 -0600
On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 18:08 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> - * come up when there is a medium error. We have to treat
> - * these two cases differently. We differentiate by looking
> - * at request->cmd, as this tells us the real story.
> + * come up when there is a medium error.
This comment isn't wrong. That's exactly what this piece of code:
if (sreq->sr_magic == SCSI_REQ_MAGIC) {
is all about ... that's how it distinguishes between the two cases.
The comment is misleading --- what it actually should say is that req-
>special has different contents depending upon the two cases, so
rephrasing it to be more accurate would be helpful.
James
-
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/
- Previous message: Patrick Mochel: "Re: klists and struct device semaphores"
- In reply to: Tejun Heo: "Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 09/13] scsi: in scsi_prep_fn(), remove bogus comments & clean up"
- Next in thread: Tejun Heo: "Re: [PATCH scsi-misc-2.6 07/13] scsi: move error handling out of scsi_init_io() into scsi_prep_fn()"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
