Re: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-29 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 04:15:56PM -0600, Moore, Eric wrote: > On Tuesday, September 25, 2007 7:38 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > As I said, it's ambitious. But it'll let us get rid of scsi_pointer > > and host_scribble entirely. > > Are you serious about removing the host_scribble? In fus

RE: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-28 Thread Moore, Eric
On Tuesday, September 25, 2007 7:38 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > As I said, it's ambitious. But it'll let us get rid of scsi_pointer > and host_scribble entirely. > Are you serious about removing the host_scribble? In fusion we currently are hanging our per request message frame pointer th

Re: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-25 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 04:51:06PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > As I said, it's ambitious. But it'll let us get rid of scsi_pointer > > and host_scribble entirely. > > > This all is an excellent idea and you will find that in the patchset to > gdth, I have made the work of one driver a bit easi

Re: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-25 Thread Boaz Harrosh
On Tue, Sep 25 2007 at 15:37 +0200, Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christoph grabbed me on IRC and we debated some of my plans for scsi_cmnd; > with his permission I'm summarising the result of that debate for posterity. > There's four main things discussed: > > 1. I'm going to be wri

Re: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-25 Thread Matthew Wilcox
On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 02:47:50PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 07:37:33AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > 2. Thanks to a thinko, we also discussed the upper-layer ->done. We think > > it should be feasible to move this from the scsi_cmnd to the scsi_device > > since

Re: Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-25 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 07:37:33AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > 2. Thanks to a thinko, we also discussed the upper-layer ->done. We think > it should be feasible to move this from the scsi_cmnd to the scsi_device > since sg doesn't use it. I suspect putting it into the scsi_driver would be even

Some plans for scsi_cmnd

2007-09-25 Thread Matthew Wilcox
Christoph grabbed me on IRC and we debated some of my plans for scsi_cmnd; with his permission I'm summarising the result of that debate for posterity. There's four main things discussed: 1. I'm going to be writing and posting patches over the next week or so to kill all the (ab)uses of ->scsi_do