From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
Cc: Mike Anderson <andmike@us.ibm.com>,
"Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>,
linux-scsi mailing list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sym53c8xx PPR negotiation fix
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:09:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1067656195.3112.551.camel@compaq.xsintricity.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1067654044.2464.29.camel@mulgrave>
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 21:34, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 19:22, Mike Anderson wrote:
> > It is called from scsi_remove_device.
>
> But that's only called for configured devices. The original intent was
> to call slave_destroy for all slave_alloc'd devices (whether configured
> or not).
>
> It originally was in scsi_free_sdev, but was moved with
>
> ChangeSet 1.1046.597.3 2003/08/02 12:17:19 andmike@us.ibm.com
> [PATCH] scsi host / scsi device ref counting take 2 [3/3]
>
> The changelog isn't very explicit about why this was done, what was the
> particular reason?
It really should be called on all devices, not just configured devices.
The assumption that a device driver doesn't need to allocate local
storage to even do something as simple as INQUIRY and can wait until
slave_configure() to allocate anything is an invalid assumption. In
fact, when I originally was working on this I think I modified the
aic7xxx_old driver to get rid of as much static array type data as
possible and move it to a struct allocated in slave_alloc. Whether the
device is kept or not, it still has to alloc to work. At one point
there was also another optimization in there so that if a driver didn't
do anything besides simply kfree() the memory pointed to by
sdptr->hostdata then you could skip defining a slave_destroy() function
and instead just let scsi_free_sdev do a simple kmalloc for you. I
think that was argued against as a special case just confuses people,
can't remember.
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> 919-754-3700 x44233
Red Hat, Inc.
1801 Varsity Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27606
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-01 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-29 17:07 [PATCH] sym53c8xx PPR negotiation fix Doug Ledford
2003-10-29 17:11 ` James Bottomley
2003-10-29 17:50 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-10-29 18:02 ` Doug Ledford
[not found] ` <20031029183159.GE25237@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
2003-10-29 18:45 ` Doug Ledford
2003-10-31 23:55 ` Justin T. Gibbs
2003-10-31 23:55 ` James Bottomley
2003-11-01 0:08 ` Doug Ledford
2003-11-01 0:16 ` Justin T. Gibbs
2003-11-01 1:22 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-01 2:34 ` James Bottomley
2003-11-01 3:09 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2003-11-03 18:10 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-04 7:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-11-05 9:26 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-06 9:04 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-06 9:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-11-06 9:21 ` Mike Anderson
2003-11-01 0:02 ` Doug Ledford
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=1067656195.3112.551.camel@compaq.xsintricity.com \
--to=dledford@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=andmike@us.ibm.com \
--cc=gibbs@scsiguy.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@debian.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox