From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Christof Schmitt <christof.schmitt@de.ibm.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Move FC definitions from zfcp to global header
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:50:23 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <485153CF.3010207@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080612152624.GY30405@parisc-linux.org>
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 03:02:46PM +0200, Christof Schmitt wrote:
>> This was suggested a while ago, now i finally put together a patch
>> that moves the Fibre Channel protocol definitions from zfcp to a new
>> global header file. With the global header, the definitions can be
>> shared across all FC drives.
>
> I think this is a great step forward, thank you for doing it.
>
>> +struct ct_hdr {
>> + u8 revision;
>> + u8 in_id[3];
>> + u8 gs_type;
>> + u8 gs_subtype;
>> + u8 options;
>> + u8 reserved0;
>> + u16 cmd_rsp_code;
>> + u16 max_res_size;
>> + u8 reserved1;
>> + u8 reason_code;
>> + u8 reason_code_expl;
>> + u8 vendor_unique;
>> +} __attribute__ ((packed));
>
> I question the need for packed. Looking at <scsi/scsi.h>, none of the
> structures there are packed. Everything is naturally aligned and
> explicitly padded ('reserved1', etc). Also, those structs use __be16
> instead of u16 to allow sparse to check the correct endian conversion
> functions are used.
>
It's best to use the "__packed" macro which might be defined differently
for some tool-chains.
And it is best to *do* keep the __packed. At above example the biggest type
is be16 so for >=32 bit arches it's packed the same, by all gcc versions. But
if you start having bigger-then-natural types in a structure then different
size arches will pack things differently. I have been bitten by this, even
though I kept everything well defined.
Also I like the __packed as a warning to fellow programmers that this is
something on-the-wired defined.
And yes please use __be16 this is SCSI.
> (same comment applies to other structs in the file)
>
>> +struct fcp_cmnd_iu {
>> + u64 fcp_lun;
>
> Should be a struct scsi_lun?
>
>> + u8 crn;
>> +#if defined(__BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD)
>> + u8 reserved0:5;
>> + u8 task_attribute:3;
>> + u8 task_management_flags;
>> + u8 add_fcp_cdb_length:6;
>> + u8 rddata:1;
>> + u8 wddata:1;
>> +#elif defined(__LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD)
>> + u8 wddata:1;
>> + u8 rddata:1;
>> + u8 add_fcp_cdb_length:6;
>> + u8 task_management_flags;
>> + u8 task_attribute:3;
>> + u8 reserved0:5;
>> +#endif
>
> This isn't right; the endianness has you confused.
>
> +#elif defined(__LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD)
> + u8 task_attribute:3;
> + u8 reserved0:5;
> + u8 task_management_flags;
> + u8 wddata:1;
> + u8 rddata:1;
> + u8 add_fcp_cdb_length:6;
> +#endif
>
Yes, that GCC bug on some ARCHES, rrrr.
Matthew is right the T10 standard always define the exact
byte-order which does not change. best just define:
u8 task_attribute;
u8 task_management_flags;
u8 wd_rd_add_fcp_cdb_length;
and use things like:
enum {
task_attribute_mask = 0xc0,
task_attribute_shift = 5,
wd_flag = 0x80,
rd_flag = 0x40,
add_fcp_cdb_length_mask = 0x3F
};
>> + u8 fcp_cdb[FCP_CDB_LENGTH];
>> +} __attribute__((packed));
>
> I also wonder if we shouldn't define the fields that are in FCP-3.
>
> I also wonder whether we should define bitfields or whether we should
> let drivers mask and shift themselves. That's jejb's call, IMO.
>
My $0.017
Boaz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-12 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-12 13:02 [RFC] Move FC definitions from zfcp to global header Christof Schmitt
2008-06-12 15:19 ` Love, Robert W
2008-06-16 10:18 ` Christof Schmitt
2008-06-12 15:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-06-12 16:50 ` Boaz Harrosh [this message]
2008-06-16 11:14 ` Christof Schmitt
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=485153CF.3010207@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=christof.schmitt@de.ibm.com \
--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