On Thu, 2019-01-17 at 18:00 -0500, Douglas Gilbert wrote: > A reason from CH about why he did that would be useful. There is an instance > of struct scsi_data_buffer already in a scsi_cmnd object (called sdb), so > why not use it and keep the scsi_cmnd object "clean" ?? > > There should be a coding rule: if you abuse a structure (i.e. blasting another > object over what the type system is indicating in a obscure fashion) then that > must be noted in a comment including a rationale. This is such a case.
My guess is that the current state of the code is the result of an oversight. Bart.
