[ewg] Re: [PATCH 2/2] IB/iser: add backport & kernel addons foropen-iscsiover iSER support for RHAS4 up3 and up4

[Erez Zilber]

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> Quoting Erez Zilber <erezz at voltaire.com>:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] IB/iser: add backport & kernel addons?foropen-iscsiover iSER support for RHAS4 up3 and up4
>>
>>
>>     
>>>> I have the following files in backport/2.6.9_UX/include/src/:
>>>>
>>>> attribute_container.c - almost identical to the file on 2.6.20. I had to change one line in it.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> could be a patch ...
>>> which line?
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> Now, attribute_container.c, klist.c & transport_class.c are copied from
>> the kernel tree. I've committed the required changes in
>> ~erezz/ofabuild_iser_rh4.git & ~erezz/ofed_1_2_iser_rh4.git.
>>     
>
> git fetch git://git.openfabrics.org/~erezz/ofed_1_2_iser_rh4.git.
> fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
> Cannot get the repository state from
> git://git.openfabrics.org/~erezz/ofed_1_2_iser_rh4.git.
>
>
>   

Here's what I was able to do:

[root at hydrus t]# git-clone git://git.openfabrics.org/~vlad/ofed_1_2/.git
remote: Generating pack...
remote: Done counting 418996 objects.
remote: Deltifying 418996 objects...
remote:  100% (418996/418996) done
remote: Total 418996 (delta 333751), reused 399530 (delta 318605)
Checking files out...)
 100% (22588/22588) done
[root at hydrus t]# cd ofed_1_2
[root at hydrus ofed_1_2]# git fetch
git://git.openfabrics.org/~erezz/ofed_1_2_iser_rh4.git
remote: Generating pack...
remote: Done counting 156 objects.
Result has 133 objects.
remote: Deltifying 133 objects...
remote:  100% (133/133) done
Unpacking 133 objects
remote: Total 133 (delta 74), reused 24 (delta 5)
 100% (133/133) done

>> The main
>> change is a new dir called "kernel_addons_patches". It contains patches
>> for kernel tree files in order to create the required addons from them.
>>     
>
> sorry, but I really don't think we can touch build scripts at this point.
> Doing cp in build scripts is also a problem since it interferes with
> development (there are 2 places to edit each file).
> And adding kernel version dependency there is also really messy.
>
> Suggestion: why can't these patches be part of the regular backport directory?
>
> you copy stuff to include/src and then include it, but this just looks
> like and unnecessary extra step. Can't we include the source file from
> it original place directory, like this:
> #include "../drivers/base/attribute_container.c"
>   

I can use attribute_container.c from drivers/base. However, having some
of the addons in drivers/base while most of the addons are in
kernel_addons is confusing, isn't it? It will also require ugly
adjustments like:

kernel_patches/backport/2.6.9_U3/iscsi_scsi_addons.patch:

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/Makefile b/drivers/scsi/Makefile
index e212608..3bf2015 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/scsi/Makefile
@@ -1,2 +1,7 @@
 obj-$(CONFIG_SCSI_ISCSI_ATTRS) += scsi_transport_iscsi.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ISCSI_TCP)        += libiscsi.o   iscsi_tcp.o
+
+CFLAGS_attribute_container.o =  
-I$(PWD)/kernel_addons/backport/2.6.9_U3/include/src/
+
+scsi_transport_iscsi-y := scsi_transport_iscsi_f.o scsi.o scsi_lib.o
init.o klist.o attribute_container.o transport_class.o
+libiscsi-y             := libiscsi_f.o scsi_scan.o

(because base.h is in kernel_addons/backport/2.6.9_U3/include/src)