From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] SRP transport: Port srp_wait_for_queuecommand() to scsi-mq Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 18:44:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20161011164417.GB18822@lst.de> References: <8ce2910d-fde0-724f-a61f-8fbd7fbf499d@grimberg.me> <619e3ffc-2123-4cb0-361a-4025ba47b991@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <619e3ffc-2123-4cb0-361a-4025ba47b991@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Sagi Grimberg , Jens Axboe , Christoph Hellwig , James Bottomley , "Martin K. Petersen" , Mike Snitzer , Doug Ledford , Keith Busch , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 02:51:50PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > There are multiple direct blk_*() calls in other SCSI transport drivers. So > my proposal is to wait with moving this code into scsi_lib.c until there is > a second user of this code. I still don't think these low-level difference for blk-mq vs legacy request belong into a scsi LLDD. So I concur with Sagi that this should go into the core SCSI code. In fact I suspect we should just call it directly from scsi_internal_device_block, and maybe even scsi_internal_device_unblock for case of setting the device offline.