Re: [PATCH ver3] isd200: Allocate sense_buffer for hacked up scsi_cmnd

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:20:09 +0200
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> wrote:

> 
> Since the separation of sense_buffer from scsi_cmnd, Drivers that hack their
> own struct scsi_cmnd like here isd200, must also take care of their own
> sense_buffer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c |    5 ++++-
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c b/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> index 4f2d143..971d13d 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/isd200.c
> @@ -1470,6 +1470,7 @@ static void isd200_free_info_ptrs(void *info_)
>  	if (info) {
>  		kfree(info->id);
>  		kfree(info->RegsBuf);
> +		kfree(info->srb.sense_buffer);
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -1495,7 +1496,9 @@ static int isd200_init_info(struct us_data *us)
>  				kzalloc(sizeof(struct hd_driveid), GFP_KERNEL);
>  		info->RegsBuf = (unsigned char *)
>  				kmalloc(sizeof(info->ATARegs), GFP_KERNEL);
> -		if (!info->id || !info->RegsBuf) {
> +		info->srb.sense_buffer =
> +				kmalloc(SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (!info->id || !info->RegsBuf || !info->srb.sense_buffer) {
>  			isd200_free_info_ptrs(info);
>  			kfree(info);
>  			retStatus = ISD200_ERROR;

I've thoroughly lost the plot here.  Is this needed in 2.6.25?  If so, why?

Thanks.