Mike Christie wrote:
Mike Christie wrote:
For drivers like sg and st, do mean the the sg list that is passed to
functions like scsi_execute_async? If we kill that argument, and instead
have sg.c and other scsi_execute_async callers just call blk helpers
like blk_rq_map_user then we would
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 11:58:14 -0500
Mike Christie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:13:41 -0500
Mike Christie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
Allocating 64K contiguous memory is not good so the next thing to do
is converting sg to
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 12:20:43 -0500
Mike Christie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Christie wrote:
For drivers like sg and st, do mean the the sg list that is passed to
functions like scsi_execute_async? If we kill that argument, and instead
have sg.c and other scsi_execute_async callers
On Wed, Aug 08 2007, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
Now only scsi-ml is changed to allocate chaining sg list
properly. Others like cciss are not converted yet, I think. It might
make sense to have the standard block layer functions to allocate
chaining sg list properly. So we could convert to
Mike Christie wrote:
For drivers like sg and st, do mean the the sg list that is passed to
functions like scsi_execute_async? If we kill that argument, and instead
have sg.c and other scsi_execute_async callers just call blk helpers
like blk_rq_map_user then we would not have to worry about
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
Allocating 64K contiguous memory is not good so the next thing to do
is converting sg to use the sg chaining support fully. Or it might be
For LLDs like aic7xxx, I think we are stuck with a small
scsi_host_template-sg_tablesize, so to continue to get large requests
On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:13:41 -0500
Mike Christie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
Allocating 64K contiguous memory is not good so the next thing to do
is converting sg to use the sg chaining support fully. Or it might be
For LLDs like aic7xxx, I think we are stuck with a
unsigned short is too small for sizeof(struct scatterlist) *
min(q-max_hw_segments, q-max_phys_segments).
This fixes memory leak with 4096 segments since 16 (likely sg size
with x86) * 4096 sets sglist_len to zero.
This might not happen without sg chaining support.
Signed-off-by: FUJITA
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
unsigned short is too small for sizeof(struct scatterlist) *
min(q-max_hw_segments, q-max_phys_segments).
This fixes memory leak with 4096 segments since 16 (likely sg size
with x86) * 4096 sets sglist_len to zero.
This might not happen without sg chaining support.
On Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:55:16 -0400
Douglas Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
unsigned short is too small for sizeof(struct scatterlist) *
min(q-max_hw_segments, q-max_phys_segments).
This fixes memory leak with 4096 segments since 16 (likely sg size
with x86) *
10 matches
Mail list logo