Re: Possible bug in scsi_lib.c:scsi_req_map_sg()

[Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>]

Mike Christie wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 10:21 -0600, Mike Christie wrote:
>>> I think they get around this and other request settings that need
>>> resetting by using scsi_execute_async. They will take the command, data
>>> direction and buffer fields from the original scsi_cmnd, then pass those
>>> on to scsi_ececute_async which would allocate a new request and then as
>>> you know that new request gets sent to the scsi layer and looks like a
>>> brand new request. So I misspoke above. It might be better to say they
>>> are using it for routing what the other multipath layers would call
>>> cloned commands.
>> But actually, that's what I don't think they want to do.
> 
> Yeah, you are right. Proper cloning is the better way to go.

I meant routing of commands and possibly cloning like you described, not
just cloning.