From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03151C433F5 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 13:06:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237250AbiBWNGa (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2022 08:06:30 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59532 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240730AbiBWNG0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2022 08:06:26 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 026F896817 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 05:05:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A853868AA6; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 14:05:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 14:05:54 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: Christoph Hellwig , "Martin K. Petersen" , James Bottomley , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 00/51] SCSI EH argument reshuffle part II Message-ID: <20220223130554.GB4489@lst.de> References: <20210817091456.73342-1-hare@suse.de> <20210817121307.GA30436@lst.de> <1b9ad85c-407d-0877-964c-5f685d8cc702@suse.de> <20220223124956.GA4373@lst.de> <8cb8268e-d058-cc75-423b-969631496d75@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8cb8268e-d058-cc75-423b-969631496d75@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 02:03:01PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Sure. Against which tree? > The SCSI pointer and scsi_request removal will have an impact onto these > patches I guess, so I'd rather code against those patches folded in. The SCSI pointer removal already is in Martin's staging tree, so that is a good baseline. I don't think the the scsi_request removal should have much overlap with the various driver patches and just a trivial overlap with the scsi_ioctl_reset changes. So maybe just prepare a first batch that is needed for the eh_host_reset prototype changes against Martin's staging tree?