Re: [PATCH 03/11] block: add rq->resid_len

[Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>]

Hello.

Tejun Heo wrote:

> rq->data_len served two purposes - the length of data buffer on issue
> and the residual count on completion.  This duality creates some
> headaches.

> First of all, block layer and low level drivers can't really determine
> what rq->data_len contains while a request is executing.  It could be
> the total request length or it coulde be anything else one of the
> lower layers is using to keep track of residual count.  This
> complicates things because blk_rq_bytes() and thus
> [__]blk_end_request_all() relies on rq->data_len for PC commands.
> Drivers which want to report residual count should first cache the
> total request length, update rq->data_len and then complete the
> request with the cached data length.

> Secondly, it makes requests default to reporting full residual count,
> ie. reporting that no data transfer occurred.  The residual count is
> an exception not the norm; however, the driver should clear
> rq->data_len to zero to signify the normal cases while leaving it
> alone means no data transfer occurred at all.  This reverse default
> behavior complicates code unnecessarily and renders block PC on some
> drivers (ide-tape/floppy) unuseable.

> This patch adds rq->resid_len which is used only for residual count.

> While at it, remove now unnecessasry blk_rq_bytes() caching in
> ide_pc_intr() as rq->data_len is not changed anymore.

> Boaz: spotted missing conversion in osd.

> [ Impact: cleanup residual count handling, report 0 resid by default ]

> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>

[...]

> diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-tape.c b/drivers/ide/ide-tape.c
> index 7149224..3813a0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/ide/ide-tape.c
> +++ b/drivers/ide/ide-tape.c
> @@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ static int ide_tape_callback(ide_drive_t *drive, int dsc)
>  		}
>  
>  		tape->first_frame += blocks;
> -		rq->data_len -= blocks * tape->blk_size;
> +		rq->resid_len = blk_rq_bytes(rq) - blocks * tape->blk_size;

    Is it already guaranteed that rq->data_len == blk_rq_bytes(rq) here?

MBR, Sergei