linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: fallback to the other IDENTIFY on device error, take#2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070513181344.GG27604@redhat.com>
Date:	Sun, 13 May 2007 14:13:44 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	William Thompson <wt@...ctro-mechanical.com>,
	Mark Lord <liml@....ca>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
	albertcc@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: fallback to the other IDENTIFY on device error, take#2

On Sun, May 13, 2007 at 07:50:16PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
 > > Otherwise, as Jeff mentions, you're doing a redundant assignment
 > > in the else branch.
 > 
 > Hmmm... I'm feeling very dense today.  At that point, class is either
 > ATA_DEV_ATA or ATA_DEV_ATAPI.  The if-else clause tries to flip between
 > the two.
 > 
 > 1. if class == ATA_DEV_ATA, the 'if' test succeeds and "class =
 > ATA_DEV_ATAPI" runs, so it flips correctly.
 > 
 > 2. if class == ATA_DEV_ATAPI,  the 'if' test fails and "class =
 > ATA_DEV_ATA" runs, so it flips correctly.
 > 
 > What am I missing here?  Feel free to scream at me and hammer me into
 > senses.  :-)

actually, I think I'm denser today. Ignore that last mail.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/