Re: [PATCH v2] ata: libata-core: Simplies if condition

[Damien Le Moal]

On 4/28/23 10:53, Yahu Gao wrote:
> ping ...
> 
> 在 2023/4/22 20:14, Yahu Gao 写道:
>> From: Yahu Gao <gaoyh12@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Replace conditions of avoid issuing [P]IDENTIFY to PMP.

Please be a little more descriptive. Something like:

Simplify the condition used in ata_dev_revalidate() to not issue identify
commands to port multiplier devices.

would be better.

>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@xxxxxxxxxx>

Where does this review come from ? I have never seen an email for it. I cannot
accept this tag without seeing the email for it.

>> Signed-off-by: Yahu Gao <gaoyh12@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>> index 14c17c3bda4e..53f65d751189 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>> @@ -3802,11 +3802,7 @@ int ata_dev_revalidate(struct ata_device *dev, unsigned int new_class,
>>   		return -ENODEV;
>>   
>>   	/* fail early if !ATA && !ATAPI to avoid issuing [P]IDENTIFY to PMP */
>> -	if (ata_class_enabled(new_class) &&

Please keep the above "ata_class_enabled(new_class) &&" condition:

	if (ata_class_enabled(new_class) && new_class == ATA_DEV_PMP) {

While keeping this condition is logically not necessary, having it makes the
code easier to understand.

>> -	    new_class != ATA_DEV_ATA &&
>> -	    new_class != ATA_DEV_ATAPI &&
>> -	    new_class != ATA_DEV_ZAC &&
>> -	    new_class != ATA_DEV_SEMB) {
>> +	if (new_class == ATA_DEV_PMP) {
>>   		ata_dev_info(dev, "class mismatch %u != %u\n",
>>   			     dev->class, new_class);
>>   		rc = -ENODEV;