From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/8] core: Introduce scsi_get_sector()
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 13:10:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq1o8ddb64r.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <255c55c7-fbaf-9443-7d0d-16ebe0e37004@acm.org> (Bart Van Assche's message of "Fri, 14 May 2021 09:06:20 -0700")
Bart,
> or in other words, the starting offset divided by 512 is assigned to
> the reference tag instead of the starting offset divided by the
> logical block size. I think that's a bug.
It is. And I have most of these fixed in my integrity branch that
reworks how LLDs interact with the SCSI midlayer. I've only done
mpt3sas, qla2xxx, and lpfc because that's what I test with. I.e. I
missed zfcp and iser.
I will review your series shortly. But since all the integrity stuff is
transitioning to the t10_pi_foo* interfaces, my initial hunch is that we
probably just want to get rid of scsi_get_lba() completely and use
blk_rq_pos() directly for the places where we want block layer
addressing. I'm not a big fan of _pos() and like _sector() much
better. But I do think that the blk_ prefix makes it clear that we're
referring to sectors and not logical blocks, physical blocks, or
protection intervals.
Anyway. More in an hour or so...
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-14 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-13 22:37 [PATCH v3 0/8] Rename scsi_get_lba() into scsi_get_sector() Bart Van Assche
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] core: Introduce scsi_get_sector() Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 1:57 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-14 6:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-14 16:06 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 17:10 ` Martin K. Petersen [this message]
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] iser: Use scsi_get_sector() instead of scsi_get_lba() Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 1:57 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] zfcp: " Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 1:58 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-17 17:23 ` Benjamin Block
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] isci: " Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 1:58 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] lpfc: " Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 2:00 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-14 2:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] qla2xxx: " Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 2:02 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-14 3:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] ufs: Fix the tracing code Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 2:05 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-13 22:37 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] core: Remove scsi_get_lba() Bart Van Assche
2021-05-14 2:06 ` Damien Le Moal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=yq1o8ddb64r.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com \
--to=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.