On 12 Aug 2020, at 19:51, Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> HI Jess,
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:21 PM Jessica Clarke <jrt...@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 12 Aug 2020, at 19:15, Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Control: tags 957380 + patch
>>> Control: tags 957380 + pending
>>>
>>> Dear maintainer,
>>>
>>> I've prepared an NMU for istgt (versioned as 0.4~20111008-3.1) and
>>> uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I
>>> should cancel it.
>>
>> Thanks, I've been meaning to do this but it's just not a high enough
>> priority for me. Could you please however use `typedef` instead, as I
>> believe the intent of the code (based on how these ones are written,
>> and what's around it) is to have `ISTGT_LU_TASK_TYPE` be the type name,
>> not `enum ISTGT_LU_TASK_TYPE`? Would you also be willing to file it as
>> a merge request against https://salsa.debian.org/bsd-team/istgt?
>
> I have cancelled the upload from DELAYED queue but I am not really
> sure how you can use typedef here.
> iiuc, ISTGT_LU_TASK_TYPE is supposed to be an enum which has
> ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESPONSE and ISTGT_LU_TASK_REQPDU as its members where
> ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESPONSE will have a value of 1 and ISTGT_LU_TASK_REQPDU
> will have 0 and these enum members are used in the code to determine
> the task type.
typedef enum {
ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESULT_IMMEDIATE = 0,
ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESULT_QUEUE_OK = 1,
ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESULT_QUEUE_FULL = 2,
} ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESULT;
should work, i.e. just adding typedef to the original code, instead of
moving the ISTGT_LU_TASK_RESULT etc around.
Jess
