On May 22, 2018, at 5:31 PM, Kees Cook [off-list ref] wrote:

=20

quoted

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Jens Axboe [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 5/22/18 1:13 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

quoted

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 01:09:41PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
I think Martin and Christoph are objecting to moving the code to
block/scsi_ioctl.h. I don't care too much about where the code is, but
think it would be nice to have the definitions in a separate header. Bu=

t

quoted

quoted

quoted

if they prefer just pulling in all of SCSI for it, well then I guess
it's pointless to move the header bits. Seems very heavy handed to me,
though.

=20
It might be heavy handed for the 3 remaining users of drivers/ide,

=20
Brutal :-)

=20
Heh. I noticed a similar sense buffer use in drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c
too. Is this okay under the same considerations?

This is going from somewhat crazy to pretty nuts, imho. I guess in practical=
 terms it doesn=E2=80=99t matter that much, since most folks would be using s=
r. I still think a split would be vastly superior. Just keep the scsi code i=
n drivers/scsi/ and make it independently selectable.

Jens