On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 09:15 +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> The architecture seems to disagree somewhat :)
You mean you all got doc?? What kind of hackers R u guys ;-)
> anyway... I'd prefer the following patch:
Works for me (tm)
> s390: Improve response code handling in chsc_enable_facility().
>
> Rather than checking for some known failures, check positively for the
> success response code 0x0001 and return -EIO for unrecognized failure
> response codes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <[email protected]>
>
> chsc.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/chsc.c b/drivers/s390/cio/chsc.c
> index 8cf9905..f4183d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/cio/chsc.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/chsc.c
> @@ -1115,6 +1115,9 @@ chsc_enable_facility(int operation_code)
> goto out;
> }
> switch (sda_area->response.code) {
> + case 0x0001: /* everything ok */
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> case 0x0003: /* invalid request block */
> case 0x0007:
> ret = -EINVAL;
> @@ -1123,6 +1126,8 @@ chsc_enable_facility(int operation_code)
> case 0x0101: /* facility not provided */
> ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> break;
> + default: /* something went wrong */
> + ret = -EIO;
> }
> out:
> free_page((unsigned long)sda_area);
Many thanks,
Greg Smith
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
