From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 02/10] IB/core: Introduce Signature Verbs API Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 14:15:16 +0200 Message-ID: <52763E54.6000607@mellanox.com> References: <1383222255-22699-1-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <1383222255-22699-3-git-send-email-sagig@mellanox.com> <5273C4FC.4070708@acm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5273C4FC.4070708-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Bart Van Assche , linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc: oren-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, tzahio-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 11/1/2013 5:13 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 31/10/2013 5:24, Sagi Grimberg wrote: >> +/** >> + * struct ib_sig_domain - Parameters specific for T10-DIF >> + * domain. >> + * @sig_type: specific signauture type >> + * @sig: union of all signature domain attributes that may >> + * be used to set domain layout. >> + * @dif: >> + * @type: T10-DIF type (0|1|2|3) >> + * @bg_type: T10-DIF block guard type (CRC|CSUM) >> + * @block_size: block size in signature domain. >> + * @app_tag: if app_tag is owned be the user, >> + * HCA will take this value to be app_tag. >> + * @ref_tag: initial ref_tag of signature handover. >> + * @type3_inc_reftag: T10-DIF type 3 does not state >> + * about the reference tag, it is the user >> + * choice to increment it or not. >> + */ >> +struct ib_sig_domain { >> + enum ib_signature_type sig_type; >> + union { >> + struct { >> + enum ib_t10_dif_type type; >> + enum ib_t10_dif_bg_type bg_type; >> + u16 block_size; >> + u16 bg; >> + u16 app_tag; >> + u32 ref_tag; >> + bool type3_inc_reftag; >> + } dif; >> + } sig; >> +}; > > My understanding from SPC-4 is that in that when using protection > information such information is inserted after every protection > interval. A protection interval can be smaller than a logical block. > Shouldn't the name "block_size" be changed into something like > "pi_interval" to avoid confusion with the logical block size ? > > Bart. > True, for DIF types 2,3 protection interval is not restricted to be logical block length and may be smaller. I agree with pi_interval naming. Note that pi_intervals smaller than 512 bytes are not supported at the moment. Sagi. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html