scsi_cmd_ioctl() had hdr as on stack auto variable and called
copy_{from,to}_user with the address operator &hdr and sizeof(hdr).
After the refactoring, {get,put}_sg_io_hdr() takes a pointer &hdr.
So the copy_{from,to}_user within the new helper functions should
just take the given pointer argumen
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 05:09:50PM +0200, Steffen Maier wrote:
> On 8/8/19 4:18 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > I'll set up an amalgamated for-next branch tomorrow.
> Martin, is it possible that you re-wrote your for-next and it now no longer
> contains a merged 5.4/scsi-postmerge with those fi
Steffen,
> Martin, is it possible that you re-wrote your for-next and it now no
> longer contains a merged 5.4/scsi-postmerge with those fixes? At
> least I cannot find the fix code in next-20190917 and it fails again
> for me.
Yes, looks like you're right. Not sure how I managed to mess that
On 8/8/19 4:18 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
Ming,
+ .cleanup_rq = scsi_cleanup_rq,
.busy = scsi_mq_lld_busy,
.map_queues = scsi_map_queues,
};
This one is a cross-tree thing, either scsi/5.4/scsi-queue needs to
pull for-5.4/block, or do it after b
> -Original Message-
> From: Mikulas Patocka
> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 6:24 PM
> The dm-writecache target is supposed to optimize writes, not reads.
> Normally, there won't be any reads following a write, because the data would
> be
> stored in the cache in RAM.
>
> Mikulas
On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Huaisheng HS1 Ye wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mikulas Patocka
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 11:36 PM
> > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019, Huaisheng HS1 Ye wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Mikulas,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your reply, I see what you mean, but I can't
