On 2/9/21 12:43 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 2/9/21 9:48 AM, Bodo Stroesser wrote:
>> On 09.02.21 13:38, Mike Christie wrote:
>>> +void target_queued_submit_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>> +{
>>> + struct se_cmd_queue *sq = container_of(work, struct se_cmd_queue, work);
>>> + struct se_cmd *se_cmd, *next_cmd;
>>> + struct llist_node *cmd_list;
>>> + unsigned char *cdb;
>>> +
>>> + cmd_list = llist_del_all(&sq->cmd_list);
>>> + if (!cmd_list)
>>> + /* Previous call took what we were queued to submit */
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + cmd_list = llist_reverse_order(cmd_list);
>>> + llist_for_each_entry_safe(se_cmd, next_cmd, cmd_list, se_cmd_list) {
>>> + cdb = se_cmd->se_tfo->get_cdb(se_cmd);
>>
>> If I got it right, get_cdb is a new, optional callback.
>> So, should we check, whether it is set?
>
> I think a check is not really useful. The caller has to implement it
> if they call target_queue_cmd_submit. It would be a BUG() and so
> either way you would get a crash when you are developing a patch.
I'll actually add the BUG. It looks like it's preferred in the lio code.
