From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
To: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>,
Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>,
Joe Eykholt <jeykholt@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tcm_loop: Add DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL CDB support
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:02:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1284580937.13344.9.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C90D346.1030907@panasas.com>
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 16:08 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 09/15/2010 02:06 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
> >
> > This patch series adds DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL CDB to the TCM_Loop Virtual SCSI
> > LLD module. This includes the following changes:
> >
> > *) Add call to include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h:scsi_bidi_cmnd() to set
> > TCM struct se_cmd internal data_direction in tcm_loop_allocate_core_cmd()
> > *) Update tcm_loop_new_cmd_map() to handle BIDI READ payload from scsi_in()
> > *) Drop DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL usage check from tcm_loop_queuecommand()
> > *) Add tcm_loop_slave_alloc() and tcm_loop_slave_configure() handlers for
> > struct scsi_host_template to set QUEUE_FLAG_BIDI in the former.
> >
> > So far this has been tested together with commit 1f8f3eda132c using XDWRITE_READ_10
> > via BSG userspace code on a v2.6.36-rc3 kernel.
> >
>
> I'll start the review with this patch. Then we'll move on to the bigger harder one.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/target/tcm_loop/tcm_loop_fabric_scsi.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++------
> > 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/target/tcm_loop/tcm_loop_fabric_scsi.c b/drivers/target/tcm_loop/tcm_loop_fabric_scsi.c
> > index 644f978..c4139d8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/target/tcm_loop/tcm_loop_fabric_scsi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/target/tcm_loop/tcm_loop_fabric_scsi.c
> > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ static struct se_cmd *tcm_loop_allocate_core_cmd(
> > struct tcm_loop_nexus *tl_nexus = tl_hba->tl_nexus;
> > struct tcm_loop_cmd *tl_cmd;
> > int sam_task_attr;
> > + enum dma_data_direction data_direction;
> >
> > if (!(tl_nexus)) {
> > scmd_printk(KERN_ERR, sc, "TCM_Loop I_T Nexus"
> > @@ -81,6 +82,13 @@ static struct se_cmd *tcm_loop_allocate_core_cmd(
> > * Save the pointer to struct scsi_cmnd *sc
> > */
> > tl_cmd->sc = sc;
> > + /*
> > + * Check for scsi_bidi_cmnd() to signal TCM Core for DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL
> > + */
> > + if (scsi_bidi_cmnd(sc))
> > + data_direction =
> > + else
> > + data_direction = sc->sc_data_direction;
>
> So you noticed that scsi-ml has a data_direction = DMA_TO_DEVICE and
> scsi_bidi_cmnd(sc) == true. I think you could do the same and code will
> be more simple, see below.
>
> So for start this here is just droped
Hi Boaz,
Thanks for the previous emails wrt to your comments about
DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL and actual BIDI-COMMAND usage. This definately
clarifies things for me now, and I will go ahead and drop the incorrect
DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL here.
>
> >
> > /*
> > * Locate the SAM Task Attr from struct scsi_cmnd *
> > @@ -105,7 +113,7 @@ static struct se_cmd *tcm_loop_allocate_core_cmd(
> > * Initialize struct se_cmd descriptor from target_core_mod infrastructure
> > */
> > transport_init_se_cmd(se_cmd, se_tpg->se_tpg_tfo, se_sess,
> > - scsi_bufflen(sc), sc->sc_data_direction, sam_task_attr,
> > + scsi_bufflen(sc), data_direction, sam_task_attr,
>
> And this is dropped
Ditto
>
> > &tl_cmd->tl_sense_buf[0]);
> > /*
> > * Locate the struct se_lun pointer and attach it to struct se_cmd
> > @@ -128,14 +136,16 @@ static struct se_cmd *tcm_loop_allocate_core_cmd(
> > /*
> > * Called by struct target_core_fabric_ops->new_cmd_map()
> > *
> > - * Always called in process context
> > + * Always called in process context. A non zero return value
> > + * here will signal to handle an exception based on the return code.
> > */
> > int tcm_loop_new_cmd_map(struct se_cmd *se_cmd)
> > {
> > struct tcm_loop_cmd *tl_cmd = container_of(se_cmd,
> > struct tcm_loop_cmd, tl_se_cmd);
> > struct scsi_cmnd *sc = tl_cmd->sc;
> > - void *mem_ptr;
> > + void *mem_ptr, *mem_bidi_ptr = NULL;
> > + u32 sg_no_bidi = 0;
> > int ret;
> > /*
> > * Allocate the necessary tasks to complete the received CDB+data
> > @@ -163,6 +173,16 @@ int tcm_loop_new_cmd_map(struct se_cmd *se_cmd)
> > if (scsi_sg_count(sc)) {
> > se_cmd->se_cmd_flags |= SCF_PASSTHROUGH_SG_TO_MEM;
> > mem_ptr = (void *)scsi_sglist(sc);
> > + /*
> > + * For BIDI commands, pass in the extra READ buffer
> > + * to transport_generic_map_mem_to_cmd() below..
> > + */
> > + if (se_cmd->data_direction == DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL) {
>
> Just change to if (scsi_bidi_cmnd(sc))
> [remember data_direction == DMA_TO_DEVICE]
<nod>
>
> > + struct scsi_data_buffer *sdb = scsi_in(sc);
> > +
> > + mem_bidi_ptr = (void *)sdb->table.sgl;
> > + sg_no_bidi = sdb->table.nents;
>
> This is the all bidi secret the presence of the scsi_in buffer
Makes sense..
>
> > + }
> > } else {
> > /*
> > * Used for DMA_NONE
> > @@ -322,15 +342,6 @@ static int tcm_loop_queuecommand(
> > }
> > tl_tpg = &tl_hba->tl_hba_tpgs[sc->device->id];transport_get_task
> > se_tpg = &tl_tpg->tl_se_tpg;
> > -
> > - if (sc->sc_data_direction == DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL) {
> > - spin_lock_irq(host->host_lock);
> > - printk(KERN_ERR "Unsupported BIDI sc->sc_data_direction: %d\n",
> > - sc->sc_data_direction);
> > - sc->result = host_byte(DID_ERROR);
> > - (*done)(sc);
> > - return 0;
> > - }
> > /*
> > * Determine the SAM Task Attribute and allocate tl_cmd and
> > * tl_cmd->tl_se_cmd from TCM infrastructure
> > @@ -446,6 +457,17 @@ release:
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +static int tcm_loop_slave_alloc(struct scsi_device *sd)
> > +{
> > + set_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_BIDI, &sd->request_queue->queue_flags);
>
> Thank got, another new one. We are up to 4
Perfect, I will make these changes to TCM_Loop and follow up on the
larger patch in a moment.
Thanks!
--nab
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-15 20:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-15 12:06 Nicholas A. Bellinger
2010-09-15 14:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-09-15 20:02 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger [this message]
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=1284580937.13344.9.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org \
--to=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
--cc=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jeykholt@cisco.com \
--cc=konrad@darnok.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
/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
Powered by JetHome