From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] SPARC64: fix iommu sg chaining Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:45:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20071017084528.GI5043@kernel.dk> References: <20071017140747Q.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20071017072149.GC5041@kernel.dk> <20071017.013325.74747630.davem@davemloft.net> <20071017.014211.41637735.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:6675 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755533AbXJQIpz (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 04:45:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071017.014211.41637735.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Cc: fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 17 2007, David Miller wrote: > From: David Miller > Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 01:33:25 -0700 (PDT) > > > sg_next() gives you a NULL after the last entry, but tests have been > > changed to compare against sg_last() which is likely not what we > > want for those checks. > > This of course isn't true, ignore me as I'm still learning how this > new stuff works :-) Righto, it's invalid to call sg_next() on the last entry! Let me know if you need any help with debugging this, unfortunately I cannot test on sparc64 myself... (I can say that easily, since I know that davem will a) not rest until this is fixed, and b) is a really good debugger and will not need my help) -- Jens Axboe