On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:15 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> In preparation for bidi we abstract all IO members of scsi_cmnd,
> that will need to duplicate, into a substructure.
>
> - Group all IO members of scsi_cmnd into a scsi_data_buffer
> structure.
> - Adjust accessors to new members.
> - scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable receive a scsi_data_buffer instead of
> scsi_cmnd. And work on it.
> - Adjust scsi_init_io() and scsi_release_buffers() for above
> change.
> - Fix other parts of scsi_lib/scsi.c to members migration. Use
> accessors where appropriate.
>
> - Old I/O members are kept for backward compatibility, since
> not all of scsi-ml/ul is converted yet. Once done they will
> be removed in a closing patch. (Other wise the patchset will
> not be bisectable)
(snip)
> @@ -114,6 +112,22 @@ struct scsi_cmnd {
> int result; /* Status code from lower level driver */
>
> unsigned char tag; /* SCSI-II queued command tag */
> +
> + union {
> + struct scsi_data_buffer sdb;
> + /*
> + * FIXME: Here for compatibility with unconverted drivers.
> + * Must be kept in sync with exact type and order
> + * of struct scsi_data_buffer members.
> + */
> + struct {
> + unsigned __deprecated request_bufflen;
> + int __deprecated resid;
> + unsigned short __deprecated use_sg;
> + unsigned short __deprecated place_holder_sg_alloc;
> + void __deprecated *request_buffer;
> + };
> + };
> };
If we add something like this, why couldn't we merge the
scsi_data_buffer patchset when I submitted last month?
I thought that I wait you to fix all the old LLDs, then will send a
clean scsi_data_buffer patchset.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
