On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 12:18 PM Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Okay, going down the scsi_sense_from_errno() path is more or less > > harmless because status and sense end up unused; even though ENODEV is > > not something that the function handles, that can be added as a > > cleanup in 10.1. > > Yes, it could be handled more explicitly. I considered adding a special > if branch in scsi_handle_rw_error() for host_status != -1 before > checking ret < 0, but didn't do it in the end because the existing code > already handles it fine. If you prefer it to be there for readability, I > can send a cleanup patch.
Don't worry, I tried when I thought it was a bug but came to the same conclusion. I have sent a patch to handle ENODEV, which makes the code a bit less mysterious, but that's it. Paolo
