On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:16:15 +0200 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05 2008 at 2:26 +0200, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 08:33:05 +0900 > > Tejun Heo <htejun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >>> Hmm, does SCSI mid-layer need to care about how many bytes the block > >>> layer allocates? I don't think that extra_len is NOT good_bytes. > >>> > >>> I think that the block layer had better take care about it (fix > >>> __end_that_request_first?). > >> Yeah, probably calling completion functions w/o bytes count is the right > >> thing to do but what I was talking about was what could break when the > >> semantics of rq->data_len changed. If we keep rq->data_len() == > >> sum(sg), we keep it business as usual for all the rest except for the > >> device application layer if we don't we do the reverse and SCSI midlayer > >> completion was a good example, I think. > > > > sglist is a low-level I/O representation for device drivers. SCSI > > midlayer should not care about sglist. We should not fix SCSI midlayer > > for rq->data_len != sum(sg) change (so I can't agree with your > > diagrams in another mail). > > > > When if we change a rule, we need to fix something. > > > > If we keep rq->data_len == sum(sg), we need to fix the device > > application layer. If we keep rq->data_len == the true data length, we > > need to fix the low-level drivers. > > > > Now I'm fine with the commit e97a294ef6938512b655b1abf17656cf2b26f709 > > since we are in -rc stages. But I plan to send a patch to revert it > > and fix this issue in the block layer. I'd like to test it in -mm for > > a while. > > No this commit is a serious bug, and the only fix is like you suggested > in __end_that_request_first. This is because it breaks that scsi-ml loop > where scsi_bufflen() can be less then blk_rq_bytes(). In that case this > commit is a data corruption. Ah, I knew that the patch doesn't work with partial completion but I thought that it doesn't happen with PC commands... And touching __end_that_request_first looked really hacky so I didn't send such patch. Moving the padding adjustment to blk_rq_map_sg (James' proposal) looks fine. Maybe Jens will come up with something better. -- 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
