On 2020-07-26 02:06, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 7/17/20 11:12 AM, Bodo Stroesser wrote:
>> Add "tmr_notification" configFS attribute to tcmu devices.
>> If default value 0 of the attribute is used, tcmu only
>> removes aborted commands from qfull_queue.
>> If user changes tmr_notification to 1, additionally
>> TMR notifications will be written to the cmd ring.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/target/target_core_user.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
>> index 92b7a2e84e64..95e66b707373 100644
>> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
>> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
>> @@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ struct tcmu_dev {
>> #define TCMU_DEV_BIT_OPEN 0
>> #define TCMU_DEV_BIT_BROKEN 1
>> #define TCMU_DEV_BIT_BLOCKED 2
>> +#define TCMU_DEV_BIT_TMR_NOTIFY 3
>> unsigned long flags;
>>
>> struct uio_info uio_info;
>> @@ -1260,6 +1261,9 @@ tcmu_tmr_notify(struct se_device *se_dev, enum tcm_tmreq_table tmf,
>> if (unqueued)
>> tcmu_set_next_deadline(&dev->qfull_queue, &dev->qfull_timer);
>>
>> + if (!test_bit(TCMU_DEV_BIT_TMR_NOTIFY, &dev->flags))
>> + goto unlock;
>> +
>> pr_debug("TMR event %d on dev %s, aborted cmds %d, afflicted cmd_ids %d\n",
>> tcmu_tmr_type(tmf), dev->name, i, cmd_cnt);
>>
>> @@ -2706,6 +2710,40 @@ static ssize_t tcmu_emulate_write_cache_store(struct config_item *item,
>> }
>> CONFIGFS_ATTR(tcmu_, emulate_write_cache);
>>
>> +static ssize_t tcmu_tmr_notification_show(struct config_item *item,
>> + char *page)
>
> Sorry about this. Just some nits.
>
> The spacing above got messed up a little. I think you only need 2 spaces, but it looks like we got some extras.
I'll fix.
>
>
>> +{
>> + struct se_dev_attrib *da = container_of(to_config_group(item),
>> + struct se_dev_attrib, da_group);
>> + struct tcmu_dev *dev = TCMU_DEV(da->da_dev);
>
>
> Could you use udev or tcmu_dev for the name. Sorry for being a broken record on this one. We use dev or se_dev for the se_device struct already and it throws me off when scanning the code.
>
> I think patch 5 and 7 need the same fix up.
>
I think I missunderstood your previous writing. I intentionally used dev and not udev because I thought you wanted it ...
No problem. I'll fix.
