On 10/30/19 6:01 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 10/30/19 9:21 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
If you feel strongly about it, I have absolutely no problem with
dropping the patch. I just would like that it be dropped for the right
reasons...
Hi Damien,
What I'm wondering about is how the SCSI core should support residual
overflow. Should a new member be introduced in struct scsi_request?
Should resid_len be changed from unsigned int to int or should we
perhaps follow yet another approach?
Please introduce a new member to hold any overflow value.
And document where it is needed.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
