On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 19:08 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 05 2008 at 1:02 +0200, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 13:44 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> >> - If we export scsi_init_io()/scsi_release_buffers() instead of
> >> scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable()
On Sat, Jan 05 2008 at 1:02 +0200, James Bottomley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 13:44 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> - If we export scsi_init_io()/scsi_release_buffers() instead of
>> scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable() from scsi_lib than tgt code is
>> much more insulated from
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 13:44 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> - If we export scsi_init_io()/scsi_release_buffers() instead of
> scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable() from scsi_lib than tgt code is
> much more insulated from scsi_lib changes. As a bonus it will
> also gain bidi capability when it come
- If we export scsi_init_io()/scsi_release_buffers() instead of
scsi_{alloc,free}_sgtable() from scsi_lib than tgt code is
much more insulated from scsi_lib changes. As a bonus it will
also gain bidi capability when it comes.
Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by:
4 matches
Mail list logo