From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] scsi_cmnd: Introduce scsi_transfer_length helper Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 12:31:17 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1402477799-24610-1-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <1402477799-24610-2-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <53A920B2.9060503@cs.wisc.edu> <28678EBD-1AE9-48F9-B9E2-E6A61B042BB1@cs.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <28678EBD-1AE9-48F9-B9E2-E6A61B042BB1@cs.wisc.edu> (Michael Christie's message of "Tue, 24 Jun 2014 11:08:54 -0500") Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Christie Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , Sagi Grimberg , nab@linux-iscsi.org, roland@kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Mike" == Michael Christie writes: Mike> Do we need to check for the data direction. Something like Mike> if (scmd->sc_data_direction == DMA_TO_DEVICE) Mike> xfer_len = scsi_out(scmnd)->length; Mike> else Mike> xfer_len = scsi_in(scmnd)->length; I guess that depends on the context the wrapper is called in. I think iscsi is the only place where there's a distinction thanks to bidi. Looks like there are several places where that's done. In that case I wonder if we should have explicit scsi_in_transfer_length() and scsi_out_transfer_length() wrappers? -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering