Michal Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:--- linux-2.6.11-mm1/drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c.orig 2005-01-17 20:42:40.000000000 +0100 +++ linux-2.6.11-mm1/drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c 2005-01-17 20:43:14.000000000 +0100 @@ -197,9 +197,7 @@ static int verify_command(struct file *f if (type & CMD_WRITE_SAFE) { if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) return 0; - } - - if (!(type & CMD_WARNED)) { + } else if (!(type & CMD_WARNED)) { cmd_type[cmd[0]] = CMD_WARNED; printk(KERN_WARNING "scsi: unknown opcode 0x%02x\n", cmd[0]); }
That patch will not write the warning message in some cases.
Yes. In cases when the device is opened for reading and the command is known as safe_for_write.
Do we really want to print this warning in that case?
I think this patch is better:
---
linux-petero/drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c~scsi-filter drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c
--- linux/drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c~scsi-filter 2005-01-18 23:38:37.966026728 +0100
+++ linux-petero/drivers/block/scsi_ioctl.c 2005-01-18 23:38:37.970026120 +0100
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ static int verify_command(struct file *f
}
if (!(type & CMD_WARNED)) {
- cmd_type[cmd[0]] = CMD_WARNED;
+ cmd_type[cmd[0]] |= CMD_WARNED;
printk(KERN_WARNING "scsi: unknown opcode 0x%02x\n", cmd[0]);
}
_
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
