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: <83328d95-5d5e-f311-952c-ce627cb035ea@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Apr 2022 09:27:54 +0100
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 1/4] scsi: libsas: Add sas_execute_internal_abort_single()
To:     Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        <martin.petersen@oracle.com>, <jinpu.wang@cloud.ionos.com>,
        <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
CC:     <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <Ajish.Koshy@microchip.com>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
        <Viswas.G@microchip.com>, <hch@lst.de>, <liuqi115@huawei.com>,
        <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>
References: <1646309930-138960-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <1646309930-138960-2-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <929aede0-9e58-9c3d-5951-6151a3281edd@suse.de>
From:   John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <929aede0-9e58-9c3d-5951-6151a3281edd@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 20/04/2022 13:21, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>   int sas_execute_tmf(struct domain_device *device, void *parameter,
>>               int para_len, int force_phy_id,
>>               struct sas_tmf_task *tmf)
>> diff --git a/include/scsi/libsas.h b/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> index df2c8fc43429..2d30d57916e5 100644
>> --- a/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> +++ b/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> @@ -557,6 +557,16 @@ struct sas_ata_task {
>>       int    force_phy_id;
>>   };
>> +/* LLDDs rely on these values */
>> +enum sas_internal_abort {
>> +    SAS_INTERNAL_ABORT_SINGLE    = 0,
>> +};
>> +
> 
> Why don't you use the existing TMF_XXX values here?
> Your 'single' method pretty much _is_ a TMF_ABORT_TASK, and the 'device' 
> method _is_ a TMF_ABORT_TASK_SET, no?

Sure, they are doing the same as TMFs and there is equivalence in the 
'single' and 'device' methods, as you say.

However, as mentioned in the comment, the LLDDs rely on the values in 
enum sas_internal_abort, which do not match the values in 
TMF_ABORT{_TASK, _TASK_SET}.

Thanks,
John