From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: Current git --> kaboom [bisect] seems IDE related. Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 17:07:13 +0200 Message-ID: <47AF1321.7000107@panasas.com> References: <20080209193224.GA21448@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> <200802100006.11086.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20080210052621.GA22257@infradead.org> <200802101438.46698.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20080210144352.GA3537@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bzq-219-195-70.pop.bezeqint.net ([62.219.195.70]:33211 "EHLO bh-buildlin2.bhalevy.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751072AbYBJPKB (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Feb 2008 10:10:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20080210144352.GA3537@infradead.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Sebastian Siewior , Tejun Heo , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , James Bottomley , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 10 2008 at 16:43 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 02:38:46PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: >> The OOPS is most likely (again) my fault - I was rushing out to push out >> the fix and memset() line didn't get converted. > > The new patch works fine for me. > >> I prepared the new patch, documented it and started looking into SCSI >> build breakage... and I no longer feel comfortable with the hack :( >> >> It seems that fixing IDE properly will be easier than auditing the whole >> SCSI for all the weird assumptions on rq->cmd[] size (James?) so I'm back >> to the code, in the meantime here's the updated patch: > > Yeah, this is quite nasty. I'll attach the patch below which just > rejects a command in scsi_setup_blk_pc_cmnd if it's too large for > the scsi_cmnd cmnd array. This is probably enough but I haven't > audited all of the scsi code yet. But as James said this is > too much of a memory vastage to put it into the tree. > > Long-term the Panasas folks have looked into killing the scsi_cmnd.cmnd > filed entirely and make the struct request.cmd field dynamically sized > which would solve your problem, but probably won't be ready for 2.6.25. > > As far as I'm concerned it is very ready, and I have sent a last version for inclusion into 2.6.25. - There is a very minor patch-ability problem between last patchset and scsi-misc I will resend the pachset as a reply to this mail. - Since I never got any comments from Jens or James, this code was never accepted into -mm. So it was not widely tested. Though I have thrown every test I can on these patches. But that is still, a very limited testing. If people have a bit of spare time, please review. For some of us it is very important Thanks Boaz