On Sun, 30 May 2010 12:36:18 +0300
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -125,7 +141,7 @@ static int bs_sg_cmd_submit(struct scsi_cmd *cmd)
> > set_cmd_async(cmd);
> > else {
> > eprintf("failed to start cmd 0x%p\n", cmd);
> > - set_cmd_failed(cmd);
> > + return set_cmd_failed(cmd);
> > }
> > return 0;
> > }
> > @@ -238,6 +254,7 @@ static int bs_sg_cmd_done(struct scsi_cmd *cmd)
> > static struct backingstore_template sg_bst = {
> > .bs_name = "sg",
> > .bs_datasize = 0,
> > + .bs_passthrough = 1,
> > .bs_open = bs_sg_open,
> > .bs_close = bs_sg_close,
> > .bs_cmd_submit = bs_sg_cmd_submit,
>
> And again the Second patch should just fold into this one. And the final disposition will
> just set the .bs_cmd_submit to the proper one.
Hmm, that means this patchset adds new I/O code with sg (or
bsg). That's not passthrough..
I think that passthrough needs to overwrite some of struct
device_type_template and modify target_cmd_queue().
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
