On Sat, 2012-08-25 at 23:39 +0530, Naresh Kumar Inna wrote:
> On 8/25/2012 2:47 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-08-25 at 00:06 +0530, Naresh Kumar Inna wrote:
> >> On 8/24/2012 1:28 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 03:57 +0530, Naresh Kumar Inna wrote:
> >>>> This patch contains the first set of the header files for csiostor
> >>>> driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Naresh Kumar Inna <nar...@chelsio.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_defs.h | 143 ++++++
> >>>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_fcoe_proto.h | 843
> >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_hw.h | 668 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>> drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_init.h | 158 ++++++
> >>>> 4 files changed, 1812 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_defs.h
> >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_fcoe_proto.h
> >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_hw.h
> >>>> create mode 100644 drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_init.h
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Naresh,
> >>>
> >>> Just commenting on csio_defs.h bits here... As Robert mentioned, you'll
> >>> need to convert the driver to use (or add to) upstream protocol
> >>> definitions and drop the csio_fcoe_proto.h bits..
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Nicholas,
> >>
> >> I would like take up the discussion of the protocol header file in that
> >> email thread. Please find the rest of my replies inline.
> >>
> >> Thanks for reviewing,
> >> Naresh.
> >>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_defs.h
> >>>> b/drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_defs.h
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 0000000..4f1c713
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/csiostor/csio_defs.h
<SNIP>
> >>>> +static inline int
> >>>> +csio_list_deleted(struct list_head *list)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + return ((list->next == list) && (list->prev == list));
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#define csio_list_next(elem) (((struct list_head *)(elem))->next)
> >>>> +#define csio_list_prev(elem) (((struct list_head *)(elem))->prev)
> >>>> +
> >>>> +#define csio_deq_from_head(head, elem)
> >>>> \
> >>>> +do {
> >>>> \
> >>>> + if (!list_empty(head)) {
> >>>> \
> >>>> + *((struct list_head **)(elem)) =
> >>>> csio_list_next((head)); \
> >>>> + csio_list_next((head)) =
> >>>> \
> >>>> + csio_list_next(csio_list_next((head)));
> >>>> \
> >>>> + csio_list_prev(csio_list_next((head))) = (head);
> >>>> \
> >>>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(*((struct list_head **)(elem)));
> >>>> \
> >>>> + } else
> >>>> \
> >>>> + *((struct list_head **)(elem)) = (struct list_head
> >>>> *)NULL;\
> >>>> +} while (0)
> >>>> +
> >>>
> >>> This code is confusing as hell.. Why can't you just use normal list.h
> >>> macros for this..?
> >>
> >> I have not found an equivalent function in list.h that does the above
> >> and the following macro. Could you please point me to it? I have seen a
> >> couple of other drivers define their own macros to achieve what this
> >> macro does, hence I assumed there isnt a list.h macro that does this.
> >>
> >
> > AFAICT all that csio_deq_from_head code is supposed to do is pull an
> > item off a list, right..? Why not just:
> >
> > while (!list_empty(list)) {
> > elem = list_first_entry(list, struct elem_type,
> > elm_list);
> > list_del_init(&elem->elm_list);
> >
> > <do work>
> > <free *elem memory>
> > }
> >
>
> I will try to come up with a simpler static inline version of the macro.
> Would that work?
No. The point is that the above code is a disaster, and AFAICT there is
no reason why any of it is necessary to begin with at all.
Why can't csio_deq_from_head() just become list_first_entry() +
list_del_init() to do the exact same thing without all of the extra
overhead of list_head pointer de-reference + assignments..?
--nab
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
