Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <0f7b9765-8835-25b5-4cdb-bc78edddad37@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Mar 2022 15:17:24 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.6.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] blk-mq: Add blk_mq_init_queue_ops()
To:     Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
CC:     <axboe@kernel.dk>, <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
        <bvanassche@acm.org>, <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        <martin.petersen@oracle.com>, <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
        <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
        <beanhuo@micron.com>
References: <1647945585-197349-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <1647945585-197349-2-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <20220322111848.GA29270@lst.de>
 <cacc3f7b-c8be-0f72-1c52-562c15b468a4@huawei.com>
 <b5df2ef1-2d6d-340e-e4b4-09132dc0516b@suse.de>
 <a5e42012-c1fc-082e-e636-594abc07dd70@huawei.com>
 <306df4cf-0ee0-2b1e-044c-aed6c70122f9@suse.de>
From:   John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <306df4cf-0ee0-2b1e-044c-aed6c70122f9@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 22/03/2022 14:03, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>
>> As mentioned in the cover letter response, it just seems best to keep 
>> the normal scsi_cmnd payload but have other means to add on the 
>> internal command data, like using host_scribble or scsi_cmnd priv data.
>>
> Well; I found that most drivers I had been looking at the scsi command 
> payload isn't used at all; the drivers primarily cared about the 
> (driver-provided) payload, and were completely ignoring the scsi command 
> payload.
> 
> Similar for ATA/libsas: you basically never issue real scsi commands, 
> but either 'raw' ATA requests or SCSI TMFs. None of which are scsi 
> commands, so providing them is a bit of a waste.
> 
> (And causes irritations, too, as a scsi command requires associated 
> pointers like ->device etc to be set up. Which makes it tricky to use 
> for the initial device setup.)

A problem I see is that in scsi_mq_init_request() we allocate memories 
like sense_buffer and prot_sdb and store the pointers in the scsi_cmnd 
payload. If we then reuse a scsi_cmnd payload as an "internal" command 
payload then this data may be lost.

It might be possible to reuse the scsi cmnd payload for the "internal", 
but I would rather not get hung up on it now if possible.

Thanks,
John