On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:51:10 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18 2007 at 1:40 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 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.
>
> We do have all the old LLDs fixed. After this patchset the entire tree
> is clean. I have just forgot to send the last [33/33] patch that removes
> this. I have just sent it now, sorry.
> (The change log above explains exactly why this is done here)
As I said, I can't see why we need this compatibility hack in the
first place.
We need to wait patches 1-26 to be merged. After that, we can merge
clean scsi_data_buffer patchset (without the compatibility hack).
-
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
