[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47CD968B.1070302@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 03:35:55 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
CC: FUJITA Tomonori <tomof@....org>, efault@....de,
jens.axboe@...cle.com, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, jgarzik@...ox.com, bzolnier@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: fix residual byte count handling
Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> - good_bytes = scsi_bufflen(cmd);
>> + good_bytes = scsi_bufflen(cmd) + cmd->request->data_len;
>
> Are you sure? is it not:
> + good_bytes = scsi_bufflen(cmd) + cmd->request->extra_len
You're right. Sorry about the confusion.
>> if (cmd->request->cmd_type != REQ_TYPE_BLOCK_PC) {
>> drv = scsi_cmd_to_driver(cmd);
>> if (drv->done)
>>
>>
>
> I hate this patch. I wish you could maybe take the extra_len into
> account inside blk_end_request. The padding should be transparent
> to all concerned but the requesting LLD and the internals of the
> block layer. If block layer added padding it should take that into
> account on completion. My $0.2.
Yeah, I hate it too. As I've been saying all along, I think it just
should be rq->data_len.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists