From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH-mm] scsi: use unaligned endian helpers rather than byteshifting
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:27:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1228336068.5412.83.camel@brick> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081203201505.GE25548@parisc-linux.org>
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 13:15 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 11:37:23AM -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> > Depends on the unaligned access work in -mm. Just so you can see what the
> > transition would look like. See in particular the READ/WRITE6 bits
> > as just reading the full 32 bits and masking ends up being better on
> > lots of arches. (x86/powerpc/SH at least)
>
> > case WRITE_6:
> > case READ_6:
> > - lba = ((scsicmd->cmnd[1] & 0x1F) << 16) |
> > - (scsicmd->cmnd[2] << 8) | scsicmd->cmnd[3];
> > + lba = load_be32_noalign((__be32 *)&scsicmd->cmnd[0]) & 0x1fffff;
> > break;
>
> That may well generate better code, but I have a hard time convincing
> myself that it's correct. This badly needs to be abstracted into
> something *THAT MAKES SENSE FOR SCSI*.
>
> James, if I resend my patches that introduce scsi_get_u24() et al, will
> you apply them? I'm tired of having to nack all the crazy patches that
> Harvey keeps sending.
>
Pardon me? How could I have done this better:
1) I went through the work to create a common API the whole kernel can
use.
2) I hooked up ~20 arches and let arches provide optimized versions
where they can.
3) Mine generates better code than what is already there
4) I made it exist for the aligned cases too in case you know it's
aligned
Then, when I send an RFC you call it crazy?
If anything I made it a whole lot goddamn easier on _YOU_
to get you scsi patches to generate good code as these endian helpers
are now available on every arch. You're fucking welcome by the way.
I also went through the kernel and removed a bunch of private endian
wrappers and got them through maintainers, who, by and large, were
happy to use the common infrastructure....other than scsi for some
reason I cannot for the life of me understand.
So add a private scsi helper if you want, I'm not standing in your way
but if anything, I think you are crazy one here.
Harvey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-03 20:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-03 19:37 [RFC PATCH-mm] scsi: use unaligned endian helpers rather than byteshifting Harvey Harrison
2008-12-03 20:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-12-03 20:27 ` Harvey Harrison [this message]
2008-12-03 20:33 ` James Bottomley
2008-12-05 9:07 ` Harvey Harrison
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1228336068.5412.83.camel@brick \
--to=harvey.harrison@gmail.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox