From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752694AbaG1QGh (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:06:37 -0400 Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com ([209.85.220.176]:53368 "EHLO mail-vc0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751478AbaG1QGe convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:06:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1406010572-13217-1-git-send-email-xerofoify@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:06:33 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390: Fix me in dasd_eer.c From: Nick Krause To: Stefan Weinhuber Cc: BOEBLINGEN LINUX390 , heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, mschwid2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Stefan Haberland1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Stefan Weinhuber wrote: > Nicholas Krause wrote on 2014-07-22 08:29:32: > > [..] >> Subject: >> >> [PATCH] s390: Fix me in dasd_eer.c >> >> This patch changes return type to EMEDUIMTYPE in function, > dasd_eer_enable >> for when checking if the medium has no errors according to this > function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause >> --- >> drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c > b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> index 21ef63c..08ee040 100644 >> --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ int dasd_eer_enable(struct dasd_device *device) >> return 0; >> >> if (!device->discipline || strcmp(device->discipline->name, "ECKD")) >> - return -EPERM; /* FIXME: -EMEDIUMTYPE ? */ >> + return -EMEDIUMTYPE; /* FIXME: -EMEDIUMTYPE ? */ >> >> cqr = dasd_kmalloc_request(DASD_ECKD_MAGIC, 1 /* SNSS */, >> SNSS_DATA_SIZE, device); >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> > > Hm, after some consideration, I have to disagree with your suggestion. > If you try to enable EER on an FBA device, you will get the following > result with current code: > > $ echo 1 > eer_enabled > -bash: echo: write error: Operation not permitted > > and with your code the following: > > $ echo 1 > eer_enabled > -bash: echo: write error: Wrong medium type > > When I wrote this code, I was not sure which one is better. But today I > say > that the 'Operation not permitted' is more to the point. An FBA device > has no (changable) medium, so what could be wrong about its type? > Could be confusing. > > From your patch description I do not really get why you want to change the > return code. Why do you think that EMEDIUMTYPE is better than EPERM? > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards > > Stefan Weinhuber > Stefan, >>From my reading seemed more like EMEDUIMTYPE return but seems I was wrong here. If you want I can remove the fix me message in a patch if you want to keep this return type. Regards Nick From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1406010572-13217-1-git-send-email-xerofoify@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:06:33 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390: Fix me in dasd_eer.c From: Nick Krause Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Stefan Weinhuber Cc: BOEBLINGEN LINUX390 , heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, mschwid2@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Stefan Haberland1 List-ID: On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Stefan Weinhuber wrote: > Nicholas Krause wrote on 2014-07-22 08:29:32: > > [..] >> Subject: >> >> [PATCH] s390: Fix me in dasd_eer.c >> >> This patch changes return type to EMEDUIMTYPE in function, > dasd_eer_enable >> for when checking if the medium has no errors according to this > function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause >> --- >> drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c > b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> index 21ef63c..08ee040 100644 >> --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eer.c >> @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ int dasd_eer_enable(struct dasd_device *device) >> return 0; >> >> if (!device->discipline || strcmp(device->discipline->name, "ECKD")) >> - return -EPERM; /* FIXME: -EMEDIUMTYPE ? */ >> + return -EMEDIUMTYPE; /* FIXME: -EMEDIUMTYPE ? */ >> >> cqr = dasd_kmalloc_request(DASD_ECKD_MAGIC, 1 /* SNSS */, >> SNSS_DATA_SIZE, device); >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> > > Hm, after some consideration, I have to disagree with your suggestion. > If you try to enable EER on an FBA device, you will get the following > result with current code: > > $ echo 1 > eer_enabled > -bash: echo: write error: Operation not permitted > > and with your code the following: > > $ echo 1 > eer_enabled > -bash: echo: write error: Wrong medium type > > When I wrote this code, I was not sure which one is better. But today I > say > that the 'Operation not permitted' is more to the point. An FBA device > has no (changable) medium, so what could be wrong about its type? > Could be confusing. > > From your patch description I do not really get why you want to change the > return code. Why do you think that EMEDIUMTYPE is better than EPERM? > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards > > Stefan Weinhuber > Stefan, >From my reading seemed more like EMEDUIMTYPE return but seems I was wrong here. If you want I can remove the fix me message in a patch if you want to keep this return type. Regards Nick