From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix rq->flags use in ide-tape.c
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 16:16:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200311051616.53701.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031105135618.GT1477@suse.de>
On Wednesday 05 of November 2003 14:56, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05 2003, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 of November 2003 13:00, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 05 of November 2003 09:40, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 04 2003, Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
> > > > > ChangeSet 1.1413, 2003/11/04 08:01:30-08:00,
> > > > > B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl
> > > > >
> > > > > [PATCH] fix rq->flags use in ide-tape.c
> > > > >
> > > > > Noticed by Stuart_Hayes@Dell.com:
> > > >
> > > > Guys, this is _way_ ugly. We definitely dont need more crap in
> > > > ->flags for private driver use, stuff them somewhere else in the rq.
> > > > rq->cmd[0] usage would be a whole lot better. This patch should never
> > > > have been merged. If each and every driver needs 5 private bits in
> > > > ->flags, well...
> > >
> > > Yeah, it is ugly. Using rq->cmd is also ugly as it hides the problem
> > > in ide-tape.c, but if you prefer this way I can clean it up. I just
> > > wanted minimal changes to ide-tape.c to make it working.
> >
> > Also putting these flags in rq->cmd[0] makes it hard to later convert
> > ide-tape.c to use rq->cmd[] for storing packet commands.
>
> What's wrong with just looking at the opcode instead of inventing magic
> flags. Seems like _just_ the right thing to do, convert to really using
> rq and killing the private command stuff as much as possible. The latter
> can wait though, the flag thing really has to go right now.
It is non-trivial cause it seems packet commands are prepared during
processing request, not prior to queuing it. Also I still don't fully
understand driver inner-workings with respect to DSC, "pipeline" and internal
commands processing.
> ide-*.c driver by Gadi are all completely over designed and attempts to
> basically implement everything themselves. Horrible.
Yep, but we should be careful in removing cruft. I've already had a hard time
fixing it after (totally unnecessary and broken) buffer_head->bio conversion.
cheers,
--bartlomiej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-05 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200311041718.hA4HIBmv027100@hera.kernel.org>
2003-11-05 8:40 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-05 12:00 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-11-05 12:14 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-11-05 12:26 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-11-05 12:36 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-05 12:36 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-05 13:54 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2003-11-05 13:56 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-05 15:16 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2003-11-05 15:23 ` Jens Axboe
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=200311051616.53701.bzolnier@elka.pw.edu.pl \
--to=b.zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®