Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751950AbXBVVml (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:42:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751948AbXBVVmk (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:42:40 -0500 Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:45274 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751943AbXBVVmj (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:42:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [Patch 1/2] cciss: fix for 2TB support From: James Bottomley To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" , mike.miller@hp.com, jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@novell.com In-Reply-To: <20070222132434.d84d3248.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20070221211039.GA2672@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net> <20070221191427.9b7cf4b0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070222165123.GC2672@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net> <20070222132434.d84d3248.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:41:24 -0600 Message-Id: <1172180484.3378.34.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-1.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2012 Lines: 52 On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 13:24 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:51:23 -0600 "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 07:14:27PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:10:39 -0600 "Mike Miller (OS Dev)" wrote: > > > > > > > Patch 1/2 > > > > + if (total_size == 0xFFFFFFFF) { > > > > > > I seem to remember having already questioned this. total_size is sector_t, which > > > can be either 32-bit or 64-bit. Are you sure that comparison works as > > > intended in both cases? > > > > > > > > > > + if(total_size == 0xFFFFFFFF) { > > > > cciss_read_capacity_16(cntl_num, i, 0, > > > > &total_size, &block_size); > > > > hba[cntl_num]->cciss_read = CCISS_READ_16; > > > > > > Here too. > > It has worked in all of the configs I've tested. Should I change it from sector_t to a > > __64? I have not tested all possible configs. > > > > I'd suggest using -1: that just works. Actually, no, that won't work. This is a SCSI heuristic for determining when to use the 16 byte version of the read capacity command. The 10 byte command can only return 32 bits of information (this is in sectors, so it returns up to 2TB of bytes). The heuristic requirement is that if the size is exactly 0xffffffff then you should try the 16 byte command (which can return 64 bits of information). If that fails then you assume the 0xfffffff is a real size otherwize, you assume it was truncated and take the real result from the 16 byte command. You can see a far more elaborate version of this in operation in sd.c:sd_read_capacity(). The only thing I'd suggest is to use 0xFFFFFFFFULL as the constant to prevent sign extension issues. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/