On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 05:05:21AM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:47:16AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:08:38AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 02:06:28PM -0700, Daniel Verkamp wrote:
> > > > + range[n].flags = cpu_to_le32(flags);
> > > > + range[n].num_sectors = cpu_to_le32(num_sectors);
> > > > + range[n].sector = cpu_to_le64(sector);
> > > ...
> > > > +/* Discard/write zeroes range for each request. */
> > > > +struct virtio_blk_discard_write_zeroes {
> > > > + /* discard/write zeroes start sector */
> > > > + __virtio64 sector;
> > > > + /* number of discard/write zeroes sectors */
> > > > + __virtio32 num_sectors;
> > > > + /* flags for this range */
> > > > + __virtio32 flags;
> > >
> > > cpu_to_le32() is being used on __virtio32 fields instead of
> > > cpu_to_virtio32().
> > >
> > > From include/uapi/linux/virtio_types.h:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * __virtio{16,32,64} have the following meaning:
> > > * - __u{16,32,64} for virtio devices in legacy mode, accessed in
> > > native endian
> > > * - __le{16,32,64} for standard-compliant virtio devices
> > > */
> > >
> > > From the VIRTIO specification:
> > >
> > > struct virtio_blk_discard_write_zeroes {
> > > le64 sector;
> > > le32 num_sectors;
> > > struct {
> > > le32 unmap:1;
> > > le32 reserved:31;
> > > } flags;
> > > };
> > >
> > >
> > > Since the VIRTIO spec says these fields are little-endian, I think these
> > > fields should be declared just __u32 and __u64 instead of __virtio32 and
> > > __virtio64.
> > >
> > > Stefan
> >
> >
> > __le32/__le64 rather?
>
> Yes.
>
> Stefan
I agree. And further using bitfields for this is questionable -
it is preferable to set bits in a full 32 bit field using "|".
--
MST
