From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Osterlund <petero2@telia.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi_cmnd->done"
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:19:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4780FF85.4020501@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0801051900500.2811@woody.linux-foundation.org>
On Sun, Jan 06 2008 at 5:43 +0200, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> This all still leaves the question unanswered why that commit
> 6f5391c283d7fdcf24bf40786ea79061919d1e1d changed any behaviour at all.
> Because the thing that Peter is describing has nothing to do with any
> low-level drivers what-so-ever.
>
> Linus
>
James Matthew.
I have a (very) wild guess at what maybe have changed with the cmnd->done
patch:
Do you remember the effective loop in scsi_lib:scsi_end_request() where
if bufflen was smaller then original request size, do to truncation
of bufflen by ULD, then the remaining of the request is re-queued again
as a new scsi-command. Well I think that the old system would call
cmnd->done for every iteration, and the new system, since the done is
called by the block-Q, does not see the resubmit of the new command.
I have not followed all code path of the matter, but I know that sr does
alters bufflen in some cases.
All this is not a bug in itself, but it is a change in behavior that might
cause the current sr hack to fail.
Boaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-06 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-02 16:25 [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi_cmnd->done" Ingo Molnar
2008-01-02 16:46 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-02 19:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 19:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-02 19:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 20:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-02 20:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 20:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-02 20:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-02 20:12 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-02 20:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-02 23:33 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-03 1:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-06 2:55 ` Peter Osterlund
2008-01-06 3:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-06 10:17 ` Peter Osterlund
2008-01-06 14:04 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 14:42 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 15:01 ` Peter Osterlund
2008-01-06 18:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-06 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-06 18:54 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 16:19 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2008-01-06 16:47 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 13:57 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 14:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-06 15:20 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 15:45 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-01-06 16:00 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 16:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-06 17:10 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-08 16:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-06 17:11 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-06 17:36 ` James Bottomley
2008-01-06 18:34 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-01-06 18:56 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-01-06 19:10 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-01-06 19:58 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-01-06 21:08 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-01-06 22:25 ` Adrian Bunk
2008-01-07 20:50 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-07 21:31 ` Alan Cox
2008-01-07 21:37 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-07 23:04 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-07 23:19 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-01-08 16:47 ` Stefan Richter
2008-01-08 17:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-08 20:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 4:01 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-09 4:10 ` Andrew Morton
2008-01-09 6:03 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-01-09 4:03 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2008-01-07 15:25 ` John Stoffel
2008-01-07 19:04 ` Stefan Richter
2008-01-07 19:59 ` John Stoffel
2008-01-06 17:29 ` Stefan Richter
2008-01-06 20:26 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-01-06 13:55 Thomas Meyer
2008-01-06 16:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
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=4780FF85.4020501@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=petero2@telia.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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