From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] first round of SCSI updates for the 5.14+ merge window
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 16:46:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <df7408f6-15a1-9e53-feb0-bbc1f3cf6e2d@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wi99u+xj93-pLG0Na7SZmjvWg6n60Pq9Wt9PgO6=exdUA@mail.gmail.com>
On 9/2/21 4:38 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 9:50 AM James Bottomley
> <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
>>
>> We also picked up a non trivial conflict with the already upstream
>> block tree in st.c
>
> Hmm. Resolving that conflict, I just reacted to how the st.c code
> passes in a NULL gendisk to scsi_ioctl() and then on to
> blk_execute_rq().
>
> Just checking that was fine, and I notice how *many* places do that.
>
> Should the blk_execute_rq() function even take that "struct gendisk
> *bd_disk" argument at all?
>
> Maybe the right thing to do would be for the people who care to just
> set rq->rq_disk before starting the request..
>
> But I guess it's traditional, and nobody cares.
We could certainly just do that. There are other things that are
required set in the request before that call, things like the queue, but
those get naturally set by the request allocation. Hence it would not be
_that_ different to require disk being set. Seems safer to just keep it
the way it is and pass in the reference, even if it ends up being NULL
in probably 50% of the cases.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-02 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-02 16:50 [GIT PULL] first round of SCSI updates for the 5.14+ merge window James Bottomley
2021-09-02 22:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-09-02 22:46 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2021-09-02 23:23 ` James Bottomley
2021-09-02 23:32 ` Jens Axboe
2021-09-03 4:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-09-03 7:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-09-02 22:42 ` pr-tracker-bot
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=df7408f6-15a1-9e53-feb0-bbc1f3cf6e2d@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).