From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/xen-scsiback: Need go to fail after xenbus_dev_error() Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:59:34 +0200 Message-ID: <542A54D6.8070906__29735.3557813496$1412060501$gmane$org@suse.com> References: <5425967F.7020002@gmail.com> <5428E0ED.1050107@suse.com> <54293742020000780003A48A@mail.emea.novell.com> <54292707.90008@gmail.com> <542927C3.8010204@suse.com> <54292D6E.4060903@gmail.com> <54296559.5020301@citrix.com> <542A4E79.4020109@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XYrPO-0008TF-8T for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 06:59:38 +0000 In-Reply-To: <542A4E79.4020109@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Chen Gang , David Vrabel , Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/30/2014 08:32 AM, Chen Gang wrote: > On 9/29/14 21:57, David Vrabel wrote: >> On 29/09/14 10:59, Chen Gang wrote: >>> >>> >>> If no any additional reply within 2 days, I shall send patch v2 for it: >>> >>> "use dev_warn() instead of xenbus_dev_error() and remove 'fail' code block" >> >> I think this driver is fine as-is and does not need any changes. >> > > OK, at least, at present, it is not a bug (will cause any issue). > > But for me, xenbus_dev_error() seems for printing generic errors, > dev_warn() is more suitable than it. I'm unbiased regarding this one. > > And 'fail' code block is useless now, need be removed, too (which will > let compiler report warning). This should be part of the patch making the 'fail' block useless. Juergen