From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>, "hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"axboe@kernek.dk" <axboe@kernek.dk>
Subject: Re: sense handling improvements
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 15:30:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1487172586.2990.4.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170215150406.GA26549@lst.de>
On Wed, 2017-02-15 at 16:04 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:19:18AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> > On 02/14/2017 08:15 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > this series is on top of the scsi_request changes in Jens' tree and
> > > further improves the handling of the sense buffer.
> > >
> >
> > Sorry, but I'm feeling really daft: which scsi_request changes?
>
> That is the "split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request"
> series.
>
> > To be found in which tree?
>
> Jens' for-next tree, as mentioned above.
Hello Christoph,
Are you aware that "split scsi passthrough fields out of struct request"
series introduces a new bug, a bug that I have already reported but that
has not yet been addressed? See also
https://www.spinics.net/lists/raid/msg55494.html.
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-15 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-14 19:15 sense handling improvements Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-14 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/6] scsi: always zero sshdr in scsi_normalize_sense Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-15 7:59 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-02-14 19:15 ` [PATCH 2/6] sd: improve TUR handling in sd_check_events Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-15 8:00 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-02-14 19:15 ` [PATCH 3/6] scsi: make the sense header argument to scsi_test_unit_ready mandatory Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-14 19:15 ` [PATCH 4/6] scsi: simplify scsi_execute_req_flags Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-14 19:15 ` [PATCH 5/6] scsi: merge __scsi_execute into scsi_execute Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-14 19:16 ` [PATCH 6/6] scsi: remove scsi_execute_req_flags Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-15 8:19 ` sense handling improvements Hannes Reinecke
2017-02-15 15:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-15 15:30 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2017-02-16 3:42 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-02-16 14:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-22 7:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-22 13:52 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-02-23 0:51 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-02-23 9:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-23 14:28 ` Martin K. Petersen
2017-02-23 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=1487172586.2990.4.camel@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=axboe@kernek.dk \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.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