On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 03:03:27PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 23/06/2025 14:35, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 09:37:10AM +0100, John Garry wrote: >>>> - else >>>> - shost->max_segment_size = BLK_MAX_SEGMENT_SIZE; >>>> + if (sht->virt_boundary_mask) >>>> + shost->virt_boundary_mask = sht->virt_boundary_mask; >>> nit: you could just always set shost->virt_boundary_mask = >>> sht->virt_boundary_mask >> I could, but it would change behavior and break drivers. The SCSI >> midlayer allows overriding the template provided values in the host >> itself after allocating and before adding it. For the >> virt_boundary_mask that features is used by iser and srp. > > Since shost is zero-init'ed, I did not think that my suggestion for this > minor simplification in scsi_host_alloc() logically changes anything. Oh, you're right - I thought we did the sht assignments in scsi_add_host. So the changes would be fine. But that also means we don't catch conflicts added by the direct shost manipulation.
