diff mbox

split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request V2

Message ID e8f4b084-be66-d5b3-5785-13b80642040f@fb.com (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Jens Axboe Jan. 26, 2017, 6:44 p.m. UTC 
On 01/26/2017 11:29 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-01-25 at 18:25 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> this series splits the support for SCSI passthrough commands from the
>> main struct request used all over the block layer into a separate
>> scsi_request structure that drivers that want to support SCSI passthough
>> need to embedded as the first thing into their request-private data,
>> similar to how we handle NVMe passthrough commands.
>>
>> To support this I've added support for that the private data after
>> request structure to the legacy request path instead, so that it can
>> be treated the same way as the blk-mq path.  Compare to the current
>> scsi_cmnd allocator that actually is a major simplification.
>>
>> Changes since V1:
>>  - fix handling of a NULL sense pointer in __scsi_execute
>>  - clean up handling of the flush flags in the block layer and MD
>>  - additional small cleanup in dm-rq
> 
> Hello Christoph,
> 
> Thanks for having fixed the NULL pointer issue I had reported for v1.
> However, if I try to run my srp-test testsuite on top of your
> hch-block/block-pc-refactor branch (commit ID a07dc3521034) merged
> with v4.10-rc5 the following appears on the console:

I think this may be my bug - does the below help?

Comments

Bart Van Assche Jan. 26, 2017, 6:52 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 11:44 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I think this may be my bug - does the below help?

Hello Jens,

What tree has that patch been generated against? It does not apply
cleanly on top of Christoph's tree:

$ git checkout hch-block-pc-refactor
$ patch -p1 --dry-run -f -s < ~/Re\:_split_scsi_passthrough_fields_out_of_struct_request_V2.mbox
1 out of 3 hunks FAILED

Thanks,

Bart.--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jens Axboe Jan. 26, 2017, 6:57 p.m. UTC | #2 
On 01/26/2017 11:52 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 11:44 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> I think this may be my bug - does the below help?
> 
> Hello Jens,
> 
> What tree has that patch been generated against? It does not apply
> cleanly on top of Christoph's tree:
> 
> $ git checkout hch-block-pc-refactor
> $ patch -p1 --dry-run -f -s < ~/Re\:_split_scsi_passthrough_fields_out_of_struct_request_V2.mbox
> 1 out of 3 hunks FAILED

It's against my for-4.11/block, which you were running under Christoph's
patches. Maybe he's using an older version? In any case, should be
pretty trivial for you to hand apply. Just ensure that .flags is set to
0 for the common cases, and inherit 'flags' when it is passed in.
Christoph Hellwig Jan. 26, 2017, 6:59 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:57:36AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> It's against my for-4.11/block, which you were running under Christoph's
> patches. Maybe he's using an older version? In any case, should be
> pretty trivial for you to hand apply. Just ensure that .flags is set to
> 0 for the common cases, and inherit 'flags' when it is passed in.

No, the flush op cleanups you asked for last round create a conflict
with your patch.  They should be trivial to fix, though.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jens Axboe Jan. 26, 2017, 7:01 p.m. UTC | #4 
On 01/26/2017 11:59 AM, hch@lst.de wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:57:36AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> It's against my for-4.11/block, which you were running under Christoph's
>> patches. Maybe he's using an older version? In any case, should be
>> pretty trivial for you to hand apply. Just ensure that .flags is set to
>> 0 for the common cases, and inherit 'flags' when it is passed in.
> 
> No, the flush op cleanups you asked for last round create a conflict
> with your patch.  They should be trivial to fix, though.

Ah, makes sense. And yes, as I said, should be trivial to hand apply the
hunk that does fail.
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
index d05061f27bb1..56b92db944ae 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@  struct request *blk_mq_sched_get_request(struct request_queue *q,
 	ctx = blk_mq_get_ctx(q);
 	hctx = blk_mq_map_queue(q, ctx->cpu);
 
-	blk_mq_set_alloc_data(data, q, 0, ctx, hctx);
+	blk_mq_set_alloc_data(data, q, data->flags, ctx, hctx);
 
 	if (e) {
 		data->flags |= BLK_MQ_REQ_INTERNAL;
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index dcb567642db7..9e4ed04f398c 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -253,7 +253,7 @@  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__blk_mq_alloc_request);
 struct request *blk_mq_alloc_request(struct request_queue *q, int rw,
 		unsigned int flags)
 {
-	struct blk_mq_alloc_data alloc_data;
+	struct blk_mq_alloc_data alloc_data = { .flags = flags };
 	struct request *rq;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -1382,7 +1382,7 @@  static blk_qc_t blk_mq_make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
 {
 	const int is_sync = op_is_sync(bio->bi_opf);
 	const int is_flush_fua = bio->bi_opf & (REQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FUA);
-	struct blk_mq_alloc_data data;
+	struct blk_mq_alloc_data data = { 0, };
 	struct request *rq;
 	unsigned int request_count = 0, srcu_idx;
 	struct blk_plug *plug;
@@ -1504,7 +1504,7 @@  static blk_qc_t blk_sq_make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
 	const int is_flush_fua = bio->bi_opf & (REQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FUA);
 	struct blk_plug *plug;
 	unsigned int request_count = 0;
-	struct blk_mq_alloc_data data;
+	struct blk_mq_alloc_data data = { 0, };
 	struct request *rq;
 	blk_qc_t cookie;
 	unsigned int wb_acct;