[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <932e7755544949139f0d283358499bb8@EX13-MBX-026.vmware.com>
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 17:12:23 +0000
From: Prasad Gondi <pgondi@...are.com>
To: "vasu.dev@...ux.intel.com" <vasu.dev@...ux.intel.com>,
Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...n.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
"fcoe-devel@...n-fcoe.org" <fcoe-devel@...n-fcoe.org>
Subject: RE: [Open-FCoE] [PATCH] scsi: fix Wunused-but-set-variable
buildwarning
Thanks Vasu for the details.
I agree current patch is good to go. I have no objections and it is an extension to the older patch which removed the " fsp->tgt_flags" flags.
Thanks,
Prasad
-----Original Message-----
From: vasu.dev@...ux.intel.com [mailto:vasu.dev@...ux.intel.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 10:10 AM
To: Nicholas Mc Guire
Cc: Prasad Gondi; linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org; James E.J. Bottomley; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Nicholas Mc Guire; fcoe-devel@...n-fcoe.org
Subject: Re: [Open-FCoE] [PATCH] scsi: fix Wunused-but-set-variable buildwarning
On Fri, 2015-05-15 at 09:14 +0200, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2015, Prasad Gondi wrote:
>
> > It seems like rpriv is used to set the fsp->tgt_flags originally
> >
> > > fsp->tgt_flags = rpriv->flags
> >
> > And fsp->tgt_flags are used in "fc_fcp_cmd_send" like this
> >
> > setup_timer(&fsp->timer, fc_fcp_timeout, (unsigned long)fsp);
> > if (rpriv->flags & FC_RP_FLAGS_REC_SUPPORTED)
> > fc_fcp_timer_set(fsp, get_fsp_rec_tov(fsp));
> >
> > Main purpose of this flags used is to set the correct TimeOut Value for fc_fcp_timer.
> >
> > So is the removal of the "fsp->tgt_flags = rpriv->flags" in fc_queuecommand() is intentional? Or by mistake?
> >
> thats something I can't say - but the commit message indicated that
> the removal of tgt_flags was intentional.
>
It was intentional and good cleanup since now rpriv->flags is used directly with that change instead of storing in fsp->tgt_flags as it was before.
> > Once we clear that out we can see whether this change make sense?
> >
Anycase the patch under discussion is straight forward clean up patch since it just removes a local stack variable which is not used.
Thanks,
Vasu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists