On 11/17/2014 02:29 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 11/13/2014 02:59 PM, Steffen Maier wrote:
>> From: Martin Peschke <mpesc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> This patch removes some leftovers for commit
>> 663e0890e31cb85f0cca5ac1faaee0d2d52880b5
>> "[SCSI] zfcp: remove access control tables interface".
>>
>> The "access denied" case for ports is gone, as well.
>> The corresponding flag was cleared, but never set.
>> So clean it up.
>>
>> Sysfs flag is kept, though, for backward-compatibility.
>> Now it returns always 0.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Martin Peschke <mpesc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Steffen Maier <ma...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c | 7 -------
>> drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_fsf.c | 3 +--
>> drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_sysfs.c | 4 +---
>> 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
>> index c82fe65..2c5d456 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_erp.c
>> @@ -821,11 +821,6 @@ static int zfcp_erp_port_forced_strategy_close(struct
>> zfcp_erp_action *act)
>> return ZFCP_ERP_CONTINUES;
>> }
>>
>> -static void zfcp_erp_port_strategy_clearstati(struct zfcp_port *port)
>> -{
>> - atomic_clear_mask(ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_DENIED, &port->status);
>> -}
>> -
>> static int zfcp_erp_port_forced_strategy(struct zfcp_erp_action *erp_action)
>> {
>> struct zfcp_port *port = erp_action->port;
>> @@ -833,7 +828,6 @@ static int zfcp_erp_port_forced_strategy(struct
>> zfcp_erp_action *erp_action)
>>
>> switch (erp_action->step) {
>> case ZFCP_ERP_STEP_UNINITIALIZED:
>> - zfcp_erp_port_strategy_clearstati(port);
>> if ((status & ZFCP_STATUS_PORT_PHYS_OPEN) &&
>> (status & ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_OPEN))
>> return zfcp_erp_port_forced_strategy_close(erp_action);
>> @@ -933,7 +927,6 @@ static int zfcp_erp_port_strategy(struct zfcp_erp_action
>> *erp_action)
>>
>> switch (erp_action->step) {
>> case ZFCP_ERP_STEP_UNINITIALIZED:
>> - zfcp_erp_port_strategy_clearstati(port);
>> if (p_status & ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_OPEN)
>> return zfcp_erp_port_strategy_close(erp_action);
>> break;
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_fsf.c b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_fsf.c
>> index 0fe8d5d..21ec5e2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_fsf.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_fsf.c
>> @@ -1396,8 +1396,7 @@ static void zfcp_fsf_open_port_handler(struct
>> zfcp_fsf_req *req)
>> port->handle = header->port_handle;
>> atomic_set_mask(ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_OPEN |
>> ZFCP_STATUS_PORT_PHYS_OPEN, &port->status);
>> - atomic_clear_mask(ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_DENIED |
>> - ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_BOXED,
>> + atomic_clear_mask(ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_BOXED,
>> &port->status);
>> /* check whether D_ID has changed during open */
>> /*
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_sysfs.c b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_sysfs.c
>> index 672b572..6b66412 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/scsi/zfcp_sysfs.c
>> @@ -73,9 +73,7 @@ ZFCP_DEFINE_ATTR(zfcp_port, port, status, "0x%08x\n",
>> ZFCP_DEFINE_ATTR(zfcp_port, port, in_recovery, "%d\n",
>> (atomic_read(&port->status) &
>> ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ERP_INUSE) != 0);
>> -ZFCP_DEFINE_ATTR(zfcp_port, port, access_denied, "%d\n",
>> - (atomic_read(&port->status) &
>> - ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_DENIED) != 0);
>> +ZFCP_DEFINE_ATTR_CONST(port, access_denied, "%d\n", 0);
>>
>> ZFCP_DEFINE_ATTR(zfcp_unit, unit, status, "0x%08x\n",
>> zfcp_unit_sdev_status(unit));
>>
> Is the ZFCP_STATUS_COMMON_ACCESS_DENIED bit still in use somewhere?
> If not, shouldn't it be removed altogether?
>
Ah. Reading the entire patch series helps.
Ignore this objection.
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <h...@suse.de>
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
h...@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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
