Il 19/03/2013 12:32, James Bottomley ha scritto: > On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 17:57 +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote: >> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> >> >> virtio_scsi_target_state is now empty. We will find new uses for it in >> the next few patches, so this patch does not drop it completely. >> However, having dropped the sglist flexible array member, we can turn >> the tgt array-of-pointers into a simple array. This simplifies the >> allocation. >> >> Even simpler would be to place the virtio_scsi_target_state structs in a >> flexible array member at the end of struct virtio_scsi. But we do not >> do that, because we will place the virtqueues there in the next patches. > > I'm really sorry, but I must have been asleep at the wheel when I let > code like this go in. No modern driver should have fixed arrays for > target information. The way this is supposed to work is that you have > entries in the host template for target_alloc and target_destroy. You > hook into these and attach your struct virtio_scsi_target_state to > scsi_target->hostdata,
So that would be sc->device->sdev_target->hostdata. > which you kmalloc in the target_alloc routine and > kfree in the target_destroy routine. Now you get at it from the sdev > with scsi_target(sdev)->hostdata. No messing around with fixed size > arrays and bulk memory allocation and no need to pass in the maximum > target size as a parameter because everything should now happen > dynamically. The maximum target size is not a module parameter, it is given by the host; so the module itself is not placing arbitrary limitation. Still it is a good idea to do it like this. Thanks for the review. Paolo > Since you're redoing the code anyway, can you fix it to work this way? > > Thanks, > > James > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
