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 92D90C433EF for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:25:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237596AbhKVR2k (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:28:40 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:44786 "EHLO mail-pj1-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232880AbhKVR2j (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 12:28:39 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f45.google.com with SMTP id o6-20020a17090a0a0600b001a64b9a11aeso481745pjo.3 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:25:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ugpxve9G4VYnMlyBIivtKHFiq8bxnHuJEk67EXz6YWM=; b=VIJGVDoL4BAzT9mSA/eiQeVHREOuKG55DUOHLCOm3Kblg/roZpDGZ7Rok1KQglKrya G9+iO6XLq0b7cYhtoJ9MbqCg8WXWge5oDmuzHUYdrnf4WbjOkQY/l3xr+ogMR8EjDo/o J9JGa72l93TJaCijUi7TjDib+OCSmgNuQkAXgjmdyzwPJ4dB5kdd3PCZ5AG0Bv10kM7q AiYG0vQXPy/lZGhwMc0pXjnyyIZt4KenXXY8UBa+5jFJnICu90TnTdR4PDwmlSBSZXv6 o6d3f3ghpzeAV/z0dKsyUuQfAfJnBwgp5D6TifHtoKTCdmm+SqI/ZJlc+g4TNJAKVHnu 0b9g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iNopjF9of+EJ796Ffxdhwj4JKyiy26hYVSNYKZt4r0+fwNzUz XejJCfbWC/524d3fl+0RPIY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYXC5Udar9eIudlRbm8RNb5QypMBrbl/VhrPXv85YHmC7g2Z+OnLIR7cEQ0u+RMC8CBt4Bbg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4a0f:: with SMTP id kk15mr32513620pjb.223.1637601932927; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:25:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from bvanassche-linux.mtv.corp.google.com ([2620:15c:211:201:3432:c377:2744:1125]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k22sm9100899pfi.149.2021.11.22.09.25.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:25:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/20] scsi: core: Add support for reserved tags To: John Garry , "Martin K . Petersen" Cc: Jaegeuk Kim , Adrian Hunter , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke , "James E.J. Bottomley" References: <20211119195743.2817-1-bvanassche@acm.org> <20211119195743.2817-7-bvanassche@acm.org> <4f76acb2-68ff-6f6a-775b-81efc4cf10cc@huawei.com> From: Bart Van Assche Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:25:30 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4f76acb2-68ff-6f6a-775b-81efc4cf10cc@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 11/22/21 12:15 AM, John Garry wrote: > On 19/11/2021 19:57, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> diff --git a/include/scsi/scsi_host.h b/include/scsi/scsi_host.h >> index 72e1a347baa6..ec0f7705e06a 100644 >> --- a/include/scsi/scsi_host.h >> +++ b/include/scsi/scsi_host.h >> @@ -367,10 +367,17 @@ struct scsi_host_template { > > why no field in struct Scsi_Host? Why to duplicate this field in struct Scsi_Host? Do we expect that there will be SCSI drivers in the future for which the number of reserved tags is only known at runtime? This seems unlikely to me. >> +    unsigned reserved_tags; > > I thought that unsigned int was preferred I will change 'unsigned' into 'unsigned int'. Bart.