[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200708050900.GA3831@lst.de>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 07:09:00 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: kbusch@...nel.org, axboe@...com, hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me,
baolin.wang7@...il.com, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: use standard block status symbolic names to
check return value
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 10:18:01AM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> It's better to use the same symbol as the return to check return value,
> and will always work in the unlikely event that the defines are reordered.
>
> Suggested-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
I'm really not sure this is worth it. When designing the blk_status_t
type keeping 0 as was a deliberate design decision.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists