[RFC PATCH] ata: pata_macio: Use WARN instead of BUG

[Michael Ellerman]

Damien Le Moal <dlemoal at kernel.org> writes:
> On 8/19/24 19:19, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> The overflow/underflow conditions in pata_macio_qc_prep() should never
>> happen. But if they do there's no need to kill the system entirely, a
>> WARN and failing the IO request should be sufficient and might allow the
>> system to keep running.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe at ellerman.id.au>
>> ---
>>  drivers/ata/pata_macio.c | 7 +++++--
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> Not sure if AC_ERR_OTHER is the right error code to use?
>
> Given that this would trigger if the command split has is buggy, I think that
> AC_ERR_SYSTEM would be better. Can you resend with the change and no "RFC" ?

Will do.

cheers