On 2023/8/17 05:49, Jan Karcher wrote:
> Hi Guangguan Wang,
>
> thank you, some minor thoughts on this one.
>
> On 16/08/2023 10:33, Guangguan Wang wrote:
...
>> -static void smc_clc_fill_fce(struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext *fce, int *len, int release_nr)
>> +static int smc_clc_fill_fce(struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext_v2x *fce,
>> + struct smc_init_info *ini)
>> {
>> + int ret = sizeof(*fce);
>> +
>> memset(fce, 0, sizeof(*fce));
>> - fce->os_type = SMC_CLC_OS_LINUX;
>> - fce->release = release_nr;
>> - memcpy(fce->hostname, smc_hostname, sizeof(smc_hostname));
>> - (*len) += sizeof(*fce);
>> + fce->fce_v20.os_type = SMC_CLC_OS_LINUX;
>> + fce->fce_v20.release = ini->release_nr;
>
> I don't like that this is called fce_v20.release which can be set to v2.1 here although the struct is named v20. Maybe let us call the struct something like fce_v2_base or fce_base_v2.
>
fce_v2_base sounds better.
>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_clc.h b/net/smc/smc_clc.h
>> index b923e89acafb..6133276a8839 100644
>> --- a/net/smc/smc_clc.h
>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_clc.h
>> @@ -147,7 +147,9 @@ struct smc_clc_msg_proposal_prefix { /* prefix part of clc proposal message*/
>> struct smc_clc_msg_smcd { /* SMC-D GID information */
>> struct smc_clc_smcd_gid_chid ism; /* ISM native GID+CHID of requestor */
>> __be16 v2_ext_offset; /* SMC Version 2 Extension Offset */
>> - u8 reserved[28];
>> + u8 vendor_oui[3];
>> + u8 vendor_exp_options[5];
>> + u8 reserved[20];
>
> Could we either make those variables a bit more self explaining via their name (e.g. vendor_organization_uid) or adding a comment /* vendor organizationally unique identifier */
>
I will fix it in the next version.
>> };
>> struct smc_clc_smcd_v2_extension {
>> @@ -231,8 +233,17 @@ struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext {
>> u8 hostname[SMC_MAX_HOSTNAME_LEN];
>> };
>> +struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext_v2x {
>> + struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext fce_v20;
>
> as stated at the top where the release is assigned i'm not completly happy with the naming.
>
Thanks,
Guangguan Wang
