On 07/09/2015 01:16 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
> This fixes the comment about return values for the function
> ibmvfc_target_alloc to correctly state it only returns zero
> as it always runs successfully and therefore never signals
> its caller with the error code -ENXIO due to this exact
> reasoning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause <xerofo...@gmail.com>
Again, just a nit on the patch description wording. Something like the
following would suffice.
"Remove mention of -ENXIO from comment on return values for
ibmvfc_slave_alloc() as the function currently always returns 0."
Otherwise,
Acked-by: Tyrel Datwyler <tyr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.c
> index 057d277..55f161b 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.c
> @@ -2854,7 +2854,7 @@ static int ibmvfc_slave_alloc(struct scsi_device *sdev)
> * expected.
> *
> * Returns:
> - * 0 on success / -ENXIO if device does not exist
> + * 0 on success
> **/
> static int ibmvfc_target_alloc(struct scsi_target *starget)
> {
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
