Re: [PATCH RFC 00/24] scsi: Revamp result values

2019-10-21 Thread Hannes Reinecke
On 10/21/19 8:32 PM, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > On 2019-10-21 5:52 a.m., Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> the 'result' field in the SCSI command is defined as having >> 4 fields. The top byte is declared as a 'driver_byte', where the >> driver can signal some internal status back to the midlay

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/24] scsi: Revamp result values

2019-10-21 Thread Finn Thain
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > > > As usual, comments and reviews are welcome. > > It is hard to make an omelette without breaking some eggs. > Coccinelle can minimize the breakage; particularly the straight-forward conversion of (FOO << 1) to SAM_STAT_BAR. -- > Doug Gilbert

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/24] scsi: Revamp result values

2019-10-21 Thread Douglas Gilbert
On 2019-10-21 5:52 a.m., Hannes Reinecke wrote: Hi all, the 'result' field in the SCSI command is defined as having 4 fields. The top byte is declared as a 'driver_byte', where the driver can signal some internal status back to the midlayer. However, there is quite a bit of overlap between the d

[PATCH RFC 00/24] scsi: Revamp result values

2019-10-21 Thread Hannes Reinecke
Hi all, the 'result' field in the SCSI command is defined as having 4 fields. The top byte is declared as a 'driver_byte', where the driver can signal some internal status back to the midlayer. However, there is quite a bit of overlap between the driver_byte and the host_byte, resulting in the dri