Date: Sat, 1 May 2010 20:28:20 +0400 From: pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com> To: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> Cc: freebsd-scsi <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> Subject: Re: mpt(4) MPI_EVENT_IR_RESYNC_UPDATE Message-ID: <l2qa31046fc1005010928m9435861s74dbfd735394ba88@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20100501150331.GA74398@alchemy.franken.de> References: <x2oa31046fc1004300536t650346afkb194ca4e2f7a7b1@mail.gmail.com> <4BDAE7BD.4000503@feral.com> <y2ka31046fc1004300750t38a97fbavbd3e6b9326e65904@mail.gmail.com> <20100501150331.GA74398@alchemy.franken.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 May 2010 19:03, Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:50:26PM +0400, pluknet wrote:
>> On 30 April 2010 18:22, Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> wrote:
>> > pluknet wrote:
>> > Seems good to me- why not trhow it freebsd-scsi? if nobody says no, I'll put
>> > it in
>>
>> Err.. I thought that list is dedicated for cam related stuff.
>>
>> [cc'ing scsi@ for better coverage. Sorry for cross-posting :/ ]
>>
>> >
>> >> --- RELENG_7_3/src/sys/dev/mpt/mpt_cam.c 2010-03-02
>> >> 15:38:13.000000000 +0300
>> >> +++ RELENG_7_3.ours/src/sys/dev/mpt/mpt_cam.c 2010-04-21
>> >> 19:31:00.000000000 +0400
>> >> @@ -2564,6 +2564,12 @@ mpt_cam_event(struct mpt_softc *mpt, req
>> >> CAMLOCK_2_MPTLOCK(mpt);
>> >> break;
>> >> }
>> >> + case MPI_EVENT_IR_RESYNC_UPDATE:
>> >> + {
>> >> + uint8_t resync = (data0 >> 16) & 0xff;
>> >> + mpt_prt(mpt, "IR resync update %d completed\n", resync);
>> >> + break;
>> >> + }
>> >> case MPI_EVENT_EVENT_CHANGE:
>> >> case MPI_EVENT_INTEGRATED_RAID:
>> >> case MPI_EVENT_SAS_DEVICE_STATUS_CHANGE:
>> >>
>> >> Another way - just hide such event since mptutil displays rebuild
>> >> progress.
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>
> Could you maybe avoid defining a variable inside a nested scope for
> consistency with the majority of the existing cases and in order to
> not violate style(9) unnecessarily?
>
> Marius
>
> Index: mpt_cam.c
> ===================================================================
> --- mpt_cam.c (revision 207463)
> +++ mpt_cam.c (working copy)
> @@ -2575,6 +2575,10 @@ mpt_cam_event(struct mpt_softc *mpt, request_t *re
> CAMLOCK_2_MPTLOCK(mpt);
> break;
> }
> + case MPI_EVENT_IR_RESYNC_UPDATE:
> + mpt_prt(mpt, "IR resync update %d completed\n",
> + (data0 >> 16) & 0xff);
> + break;
> case MPI_EVENT_EVENT_CHANGE:
> case MPI_EVENT_INTEGRATED_RAID:
> case MPI_EVENT_SAS_DEVICE_STATUS_CHANGE:
>
I'm fine with it, resync variable is not necessary there.
Thanks for review.
--
wbr,
pluknet
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l2qa31046fc1005010928m9435861s74dbfd735394ba88>