Skip to contentSkip to conversation

libsas: don't use made up error codes

PATCH In review James Bottomley 2 participants 3 messages Dec 30, 2007 – Dec 31, 2007

Subsystems (2)
SCSI SCSI libsas
lore
Share & tools
lore

James Bottomley

author maintainer
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 libsas: don't use made up error codes

This is bad for two reasons:

1. If they're returned to outside applications, no-one knows what they mean.
2. Eventually they'll clash with the ever expanding standard error codes.

The problem error code in question is ETASK. I've replaced this by ECOMM (communications error on send) a network error code that seems to most closely relay what ETASK meant.

James

drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_ata.c +1 -1
index 0829b55..adc47d4 100644
@@ -500,7 +500,7 @@ static int sas_execute_task(struct sas_task *task, void *buffer, int size,
 			goto ex_err;
 		}
 		wait_for_completion(&task->completion);
-		res = -ETASK;
+		res = -ECOMM;
 		if (task->task_state_flags & SAS_TASK_STATE_ABORTED) {
 			int res2;
 			SAS_DPRINTK("task aborted, flags:0x%x\n",
drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c +1 -1
index 8aeaad9..aefd865 100644
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ static int smp_execute_task(struct domain_device *dev, void *req, int req_size,
 		}
 
 		wait_for_completion(&task->completion);
-		res = -ETASK;
+		res = -ECOMM;
 		if ((task->task_state_flags & SAS_TASK_STATE_ABORTED)) {
 			SAS_DPRINTK("smp task timed out or aborted\n");
 			i->dft->lldd_abort_task(task);
include/scsi/libsas.h +0 -2
index 93248cd..a075f13 100644
@@ -91,8 +91,6 @@ enum discover_event {
 
 /* ---------- Expander Devices ---------- */
 
-#define ETASK 0xFA
-
 #define to_dom_device(_obj) container_of(_obj, struct domain_device, dev_obj)
 #define to_dev_attr(_attr)  container_of(_attr, struct domain_dev_attribute,\
                                          attr)
Acked-by on v1 1/1
#1 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines · James Bottomley

This is bad for two reasons:

1. If they're returned to outside applications, no-one knows what they mean.
2. Eventually they'll clash with the ever expanding standard error codes.

The problem error code in question is ETASK. I've replaced this by ECOMM (communications error on send) a network error code that seems to most closely relay what ETASK meant.

Yay, cleanups :)

Acked-by Darrick J. Wong <[email protected]>
author maintainer
#2 lore raw
Quoted 8 lines · Darrick J. Wong
Quoted 7 lines · James Bottomley

This is bad for two reasons:

1. If they're returned to outside applications, no-one knows what they mean.
2. Eventually they'll clash with the ever expanding standard error codes.

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines

The problem error code in question is ETASK. I've replaced this by ECOMM (communications error on send) a network error code that seems to most closely relay what ETASK meant.

Yay, cleanups :)

Don't get your hopes up ... this was just one that unavoidably crossed my attention path while I was doing something else. I'm not going out looking for these things ... mainly for fear of finding them in large quantities.

James