Better, although pretty verbose. I guess it's better to be explicit
than to try to compress to just a list of supported commands, probably.
On 10/10/2013 04:30 PM, ronnie sahlberg wrote:
I first had a 32-byte bitmap. That was horrible.
I could change it to have one value per line with a comment containing
both the opcode number and the name :
#define SUPPORTED
#define NOT_SUPPORTED
...
/* 0x00 TEST_UNIT_READY */ SUPPORTED,
...
What about that?
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Dan Mick <dan.mick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I like this in general, but it sure would be nice to have a more-readable
way to express command support. I'm not full of ideas but both for errors
in creation and examination it would be great.
On 10/09/2013 07:43 PM, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
Tomo, List
Please find a patch that adds an optional "which opceds are supported"
array
to the backend template.
RDWR and SHEEPDOG are modified to use these, and the opcodes that are NOT
supported by sheepdog are zeroed out so that tgtd will now respond
correctly with INVALID_OP_CODE if they are sent to a sheepdog backed LUN.
Next will be RBD but there are pending patches to that backend so I will
send
and update to it later.
Please comment/review/merge
regards
ronnie sahlberg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stgt" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
