From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Christie Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 2/4] add scsi helpers Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:55:18 -0500 Message-ID: <4329B586.6010802@cs.wisc.edu> References: <1126736388.16778.25.camel@max> <20050915101303.GB24689@infradead.org> <4329AF9F.1030209@cs.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sabe.cs.wisc.edu ([128.105.6.20]:12743 "EHLO sabe.cs.wisc.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030560AbVIORzU (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Sep 2005 13:55:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4329AF9F.1030209@cs.wisc.edu> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Christie Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Mike Christie wrote: >> >> >>> +int scsi_execute_async_iov_req(struct scsi_device *sdev, >>> + const unsigned char *cmd, int data_direction, >>> + struct kvec *vec, int vec_count, int timeout, >>> + int retries, void *privdata, >>> + void (*done)(void *, char *, int, int)) >> >> >> >> If you passed an request_queue_t instead of th scsi_device this function >> would not have any knowledge about scsi internals and could be moved up >> to the block layer. not sure that's actually a good idea. > > > Did you want to move scsi_execute too? > Actually after talking with Jens, I think it is better to keep the function in scsi_lib and move my blk_rq_map_iov() function there. The problem is that sg and st have some special needs and as a result do some things like partial setup themselves. It looks like nobody wants the burdon of having these special case fucntions :) but since SCSI's ULDs are the only user and probably will be the only user does it make sense to keep them there?