[PATCH 1/3] nvme: fix nvme_pr_* status code parsing

[Keith Busch]

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 07:18:36PM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 5/29/24 05:22, Weiwen Hu wrote:
> > Fix the parsing if extra status bits (e.g. MORE) is present.
> >
> > Renamed nvme_sc_to_pr_err to nvme_status_to_pr_err to better match its
> > semantic.
> >
> > Fixes: 7fb42780d06c ("nvme: Convert NVMe errors to PR errors")
> > Signed-off-by: Weiwen Hu <huweiwen at linux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/nvme/host/pr.c | 10 +++++-----
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pr.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pr.c
> > index e05571b2a1b0..25e23cdba151 100644
> > --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pr.c
> > +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pr.c
> > @@ -72,12 +72,12 @@ static int nvme_send_ns_pr_command(struct nvme_ns *ns, struct nvme_command *c,
> >   	return nvme_submit_sync_cmd(ns->queue, c, data, data_len);
> >   }
> >   
> > -static int nvme_sc_to_pr_err(int nvme_sc)
> > +static int nvme_status_to_pr_err(int nvme_status)
> 
> do you really have to make this helper name longer ?
> nvme_sc matches the NVME_SC and makes it easy to grep when
> looking for symbols and error codes, but if everyone is okay with
> this then sure go ahead ...

Yeah, I'd agree. In fact, just resend with only the "& 0x7ff" masking
for the "Fixes" part of this, and that can go in for 6.10. Potential
enhancments can come after.

> > -	switch (nvme_sc) {
> > +	switch (nvme_status & 0x7ff) {
> >   	case NVME_SC_SUCCESS:
> >   		return PR_STS_SUCCESS;
> >   	case NVME_SC_RESERVATION_CONFLICT: