From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/17] Clear up bidi command confusion Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 05:12:49 -0800 Message-ID: <20150123131249.GA8045@infradead.org> References: <54C2390A.3000700@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:37525 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754278AbbAWNMu (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:12:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54C2390A.3000700@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 01:05:30PM +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: > There is some confusion in the SCSI core and in SCSI LLDs around the > meaning of sc_data_direction and whether or not this member can have the > value DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL. Clear up this confusion. The patches in this > series are: I wonder if we should change the code to set DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL for bidi commands. That seems a lot more logical than the current version. Also I don't think all the debug checks for bidi commands that you change should stay at all - driver need to set the QUEUE_FLAG_BIDI to ever see a bidi command. It would also nice to add a host template flag for bidi support instead of having to poke into the block layer request_queue while we're at it.