From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] target/rd: reduce code duplication in rd_execute_rw() Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2015 13:01:07 +0300 Message-ID: <552107E3.4000504@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <1428150268-30260-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:33371 "EHLO mail-wg0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751508AbbDEKBN (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Apr 2015 06:01:13 -0400 Received: by wgin8 with SMTP id n8so6900174wgi.0 for ; Sun, 05 Apr 2015 03:01:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1428150268-30260-1-git-send-email-akinobu.mita@gmail.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Akinobu Mita , target-devel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Nicholas Bellinger , Asias He , "Martin K. Petersen" , Christoph Hellwig , "James E.J. Bottomley" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 4/4/2015 3:24 PM, Akinobu Mita wrote: > Factor out code duplication in rd_execute_rw() into a helper function > rd_do_prot_rw(). This change is required to minimize the forthcoming > fix in rd_do_prot_rw(). > > Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita > Cc: Nicholas Bellinger > Cc: Asias He > Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" > Cc: Christoph Hellwig > Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" > Cc: target-devel@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > --- > drivers/target/target_core_rd.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_rd.c b/drivers/target/target_core_rd.c > index 98e83ac..4d614c9 100644 > --- a/drivers/target/target_core_rd.c > +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_rd.c > @@ -382,6 +382,36 @@ static struct rd_dev_sg_table *rd_get_prot_table(struct rd_dev *rd_dev, u32 page > return NULL; > } > > +static sense_reason_t rd_do_prot_rw(struct se_cmd *cmd, bool is_write) > +{ > + struct se_device *se_dev = cmd->se_dev; > + struct rd_dev *dev = RD_DEV(se_dev); > + struct rd_dev_sg_table *prot_table; > + struct scatterlist *prot_sg; > + u32 sectors = cmd->data_length / se_dev->dev_attrib.block_size; > + u32 prot_offset, prot_page; > + u64 tmp; > + sense_reason_t rc; > + sense_reason_t (*dif_verify)(struct se_cmd *, sector_t, unsigned int, > + unsigned int, struct scatterlist *, int) = > + is_write ? sbc_dif_verify_write : sbc_dif_verify_read; Hi Akinobu, I think it would make more sense to pass the dif_verify() function pointer instead of is_write (only used for that anyway).