[GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[Nicholas A. Bellinger]

Hi James and Co,

Here are the latest v4.0.0-rc7 updates for mainline drivers/target/ code
rebased against linux-2.6.git -> .38-rc2.  These individual patches have
been reviewed on linux-scsi and commited into the upstream LIO kernel
tree, so please consider pulling for .38-rc3:

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-38-rc3

Also at this point, having Linus pull directly from
scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rcX for mainline target bugfixes +
improvements may make more sense.

Linus/Andrew/James, please let me know which you prefer here.

Thanks!

Signed-off-by: Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@linux-iscsi.org>

Christoph Hellwig (2):
  target: do not include target_core_mib.h under include/target
  target: remove EXTRA_CFLAGS

Dan Carpenter (2):
  target: iblock/pscsi claim checking for NULL instead of IS_ERR
  target: fix dubious one-bit signed bitfield

Fubo Chen (3):
  target: Drop nacl->device_list_lock on
    core_update_device_list_for_node failure
  target: Reaquire hba_lock + se_port_lock during se_clear_dev_ports
    continue
  target: Minor sparse warning fixes and annotations

Jesper Juhl (1):
  target/file: Fix memory leak in fd_set_configfs_dev_params().

Nicholas Bellinger (13):
  target/iblock: Fix failed bd claim NULL pointer dereference
  target/iblock: Fix memory leak in iblock_set_configfs_dev_params
  target: Fix memory leaks in
    target_core_dev_pr_store_attr_res_aptpl_metadata
  target: Fix demo-mode MappedLUN shutdown UA/PR breakage
  target: Release left-over demo-mode NodeACLs w/
    tfo->tpg_check_demo_mode_cache()=1
  target: Convert tcm_mod_builder.py from Kbuild -> Makefile
  target: Fix tcm_mod_builder.py default EXTRA_CFLAGS
  target: Remove unnecessary tcm_mod_builder.py kbuild EXTRA_CFLAGS
  target: Call missing list_del() for demo-mode MappedLUN disable
  target: Call proc_mkdir + remove_proc_entry with NULL parameter
  target: Convert backend ->create_virtdevice() call to return ERR_PTR
  target: Remove spurious double cast from structure macro accessors
  target core v4.0.0-rc7

Roland Dreier (2):
  target: Fix memory leak on error path
  target: Remove unneeded test of se_cmd

 Documentation/target/tcm_mod_builder.py |   17 +++++------
 drivers/target/Makefile                 |    1 -
 drivers/target/target_core_configfs.c   |   44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 drivers/target/target_core_device.c     |   37 +++++++++++++------------
 drivers/target/target_core_fabric_lib.c |    1 +
 drivers/target/target_core_file.c       |   26 ++++++++++++++---
 drivers/target/target_core_hba.c        |    1 +
 drivers/target/target_core_iblock.c     |   34 ++++++++++++++---------
 drivers/target/target_core_mib.c        |   20 +++++++++++++
 drivers/target/target_core_mib.h        |    7 -----
 drivers/target/target_core_pscsi.c      |   26 ++++++++++-------
 drivers/target/target_core_rd.c         |    8 +++--
 drivers/target/target_core_rd.h         |    2 -
 drivers/target/target_core_tpg.c        |   23 +++++++++++++++
 drivers/target/target_core_transport.c  |    5 +--
 include/target/target_core_base.h       |   46 +++++++++++++++++-------------
 include/target/target_core_fabric_ops.h |    2 +-
 include/target/target_core_transport.h  |    4 +++
 18 files changed, 205 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[James Bottomley]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 16:14 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> Hi James and Co,
> 
> Here are the latest v4.0.0-rc7 updates for mainline drivers/target/ code
> rebased against linux-2.6.git -> .38-rc2.  These individual patches have
> been reviewed on linux-scsi and commited into the upstream LIO kernel
> tree, so please consider pulling for .38-rc3:
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-38-rc3
> 
> Also at this point, having Linus pull directly from
> scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rcX for mainline target bugfixes +
> improvements may make more sense.
> 
> Linus/Andrew/James, please let me know which you prefer here.

Right at the moment, I'm trying to encourage a few people with
established areas to experiment with their own git trees in SCSI, but
the target subsystem, being a newcomer, wouldn't be one of these, so,
for the time being, patch series over linux-scsi please for review and
feedback.

James

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[Nicholas A. Bellinger]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 18:36 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 16:14 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > Hi James and Co,
> > 
> > Here are the latest v4.0.0-rc7 updates for mainline drivers/target/ code
> > rebased against linux-2.6.git -> .38-rc2.  These individual patches have
> > been reviewed on linux-scsi and commited into the upstream LIO kernel
> > tree, so please consider pulling for .38-rc3:
> > 
> >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-38-rc3
> > 
> > Also at this point, having Linus pull directly from
> > scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rcX for mainline target bugfixes +
> > improvements may make more sense.
> > 
> > Linus/Andrew/James, please let me know which you prefer here.
> 
> Right at the moment, I'm trying to encourage a few people with
> established areas to experiment with their own git trees in SCSI, but
> the target subsystem, being a newcomer, wouldn't be one of these, so,
> for the time being, patch series over linux-scsi please for review and
> feedback.
> 

Sure, thanks for the clarification.  The same set of patches are
available against your .37-FINAL based scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/master
HEAD here:

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-jejb

Please let me know if you have any further questions,

--nab

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[James Bottomley]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 17:27 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 18:36 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 16:14 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > > Hi James and Co,
> > > 
> > > Here are the latest v4.0.0-rc7 updates for mainline drivers/target/ code
> > > rebased against linux-2.6.git -> .38-rc2.  These individual patches have
> > > been reviewed on linux-scsi and commited into the upstream LIO kernel
> > > tree, so please consider pulling for .38-rc3:
> > > 
> > >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-38-rc3
> > > 
> > > Also at this point, having Linus pull directly from
> > > scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rcX for mainline target bugfixes +
> > > improvements may make more sense.
> > > 
> > > Linus/Andrew/James, please let me know which you prefer here.
> > 
> > Right at the moment, I'm trying to encourage a few people with
> > established areas to experiment with their own git trees in SCSI, but
> > the target subsystem, being a newcomer, wouldn't be one of these, so,
> > for the time being, patch series over linux-scsi please for review and
> > feedback.
> > 
> 
> Sure, thanks for the clarification.  The same set of patches are
> available against your .37-FINAL based scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/master
> HEAD here:
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-jejb
> 
> Please let me know if you have any further questions,

Over the list, please, not in a git tree.  What I need is for others to
review them ... and appearing on the list best encourages that.

It's also better to use something more stable as the base, like linus
head or scsi-misc as the base.  The postmerge tree is my most volatile
tree (fairly constantly rebasing as I try to get the merge fixes
right) ... and it's currently defunct until another merge clash appears.

By way of demonstration, try pulling your current postmerge tree into
linus head and see what happens (the resulting conflicts are because of
the rebases).

James

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[Nicholas A. Bellinger]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 19:38 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 17:27 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 18:36 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 16:14 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > > > Hi James and Co,
> > > > 
> > > > Here are the latest v4.0.0-rc7 updates for mainline drivers/target/ code
> > > > rebased against linux-2.6.git -> .38-rc2.  These individual patches have
> > > > been reviewed on linux-scsi and commited into the upstream LIO kernel
> > > > tree, so please consider pulling for .38-rc3:
> > > > 
> > > >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-38-rc3
> > > > 
> > > > Also at this point, having Linus pull directly from
> > > > scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rcX for mainline target bugfixes +
> > > > improvements may make more sense.
> > > > 
> > > > Linus/Andrew/James, please let me know which you prefer here.
> > > 
> > > Right at the moment, I'm trying to encourage a few people with
> > > established areas to experiment with their own git trees in SCSI, but
> > > the target subsystem, being a newcomer, wouldn't be one of these, so,
> > > for the time being, patch series over linux-scsi please for review and
> > > feedback.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sure, thanks for the clarification.  The same set of patches are
> > available against your .37-FINAL based scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/master
> > HEAD here:
> > 
> >    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/nab/scsi-post-merge-2.6.git for-jejb
> > 
> > Please let me know if you have any further questions,
> 
> Over the list, please, not in a git tree.  What I need is for others to
> review them ... and appearing on the list best encourages that.
> 

Yes, but to clarify one item.   All of these patches in for-38-rc3 and
for-jejb branches have already been sent out to linux-scsi incrementally
when they where committed into LIO upstream code.  Are you asking that
the entire patch series be re-sent to linux-scsi against .38-rc2..?

> It's also better to use something more stable as the base, like linus
> head or scsi-misc as the base.  The postmerge tree is my most volatile
> tree (fairly constantly rebasing as I try to get the merge fixes
> right) ... and it's currently defunct until another merge clash appears.
> 
> By way of demonstration, try pulling your current postmerge tree into
> linus head and see what happens (the resulting conflicts are because of
> the rebases).

Yes sorry, I should have been more specific here wrt to my
scsi-post-merge-2.6.git branches:

*) for-38-rc3: rebased to linus .38-rc2 tag

*) for-jejb: based on jejb scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/master @ .37-FINAL
from commit 7d2087a1820b (initial LIO target core v4.0.0-rc6 commit)

Both are now in sync with the upstream LIO tree v4.0.0-rc7 bugfixes, and
I have been keeping 'for-jejb' as convience for you against your initial
target merge.

--nab

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[James Bottomley]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 17:55 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 19:38 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
[...]
> > Over the list, please, not in a git tree.  What I need is for others to
> > review them ... and appearing on the list best encourages that.
> > 
> 
> Yes, but to clarify one item.   All of these patches in for-38-rc3 and
> for-jejb branches have already been sent out to linux-scsi incrementally
> when they where committed into LIO upstream code.  Are you asking that
> the entire patch series be re-sent to linux-scsi against .38-rc2..?

What I want is for you to tidy them up, make changelogs intelligible,
sanity  check them (like merge patches for people who submit one patch
per file), run checkpatch, make sure series compiles and integration
test them before rolling them up in a batch and sending them on (at an
interval of about one or two batches per merge window) ... in essence,
what a maintainer does.

James

> > It's also better to use something more stable as the base, like linus
> > head or scsi-misc as the base.  The postmerge tree is my most volatile
> > tree (fairly constantly rebasing as I try to get the merge fixes
> > right) ... and it's currently defunct until another merge clash appears.
> > 
> > By way of demonstration, try pulling your current postmerge tree into
> > linus head and see what happens (the resulting conflicts are because of
> > the rebases).
> 
> Yes sorry, I should have been more specific here wrt to my
> scsi-post-merge-2.6.git branches:
> 
> *) for-38-rc3: rebased to linus .38-rc2 tag
> 
> *) for-jejb: based on jejb scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/master @ .37-FINAL
> from commit 7d2087a1820b (initial LIO target core v4.0.0-rc6 commit)
> 
> Both are now in sync with the upstream LIO tree v4.0.0-rc7 bugfixes, and
> I have been keeping 'for-jejb' as convience for you against your initial
> target merge.
> 
> --nab
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [GIT PULL for 38-rc3] target updates for v4.0.0-rc7

[Nicholas A. Bellinger]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 20:26 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 17:55 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 19:38 -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
> [...]
> > > Over the list, please, not in a git tree.  What I need is for others to
> > > review them ... and appearing on the list best encourages that.
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, but to clarify one item.   All of these patches in for-38-rc3 and
> > for-jejb branches have already been sent out to linux-scsi incrementally
> > when they where committed into LIO upstream code.  Are you asking that
> > the entire patch series be re-sent to linux-scsi against .38-rc2..?
> 
> What I want is for you to tidy them up, make changelogs intelligible,
> sanity  check them (like merge patches for people who submit one patch
> per file), run checkpatch, make sure series compiles and integration
> test them before rolling them up in a batch and sending them on (at an
> interval of about one or two batches per merge window) ... in essence,
> what a maintainer does.
> 

Yes, this is more-or-less exactly I have been doing for the .38 round. 

This particular series could stand to have a few more minor commit's
squashed together, and a quick run through checkpatch as well.  But
other that these small items, the commits have been made tidy, with
intelligible changelogs + proper authorship with target v4.0.0-rc7
running in .38-rc2 x86_64 VM, and the bugfixes ready to be included for
mainline.

Squashing will probably save only 2-3 commits in this particular series,
but I will get these minor items condensed and produce a followup GIT
PULL v2 request from scsi-post-merge-2.6.git/for-38-rc3 against
linus .38-rc2.

Again just to verify, these will be sent out in their entirety to
linux-scsi.

--nab