[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?
From: |
olafBuddenhagen |
Subject: |
Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ? |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:15:36 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 12:08:39PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> > routine device_set_status(
> > device : device_t;
> > in flavor : dev_flavor_t;
> > in status : dev_status_t
> > );
> Why no "in" or "out" before parameter "device" ?
Well, I would have said that the first parameter is just special. (It's
the port on which the RPC was invoked; basically it's only there to give
it a name.) However, I just saw that device_open() also has other
parameters without a direction... So I have to admit quite frankly that
I don't know what this really means.
On the plus side, it's probably not necessary to know this :-)
> How to say "in and out" ?
There is also an "inout" direction.
> Can you give me an URL where the language is documented ?
I for my part never read any formal documentation for this -- just
looked at other examples in the Mach and Hurd .defs :-)
> How to name the function ? device_transact_scsi() ?
Hurray, bikeshedding time! ;-)
> > What is a bit more involved will be to add the method to the
> > device_emulation_ops structure, and the ds_device_foo routine in
> > device/ds_routines.c just like the ds_device_set_status() one.
>
> I found the struct definition in gnumach/device/device_emul.h . There
> i read
> /* Each emulation layer provides these operations. */
>
> Does that mean, that all instances of struct device_emulation_ops have
> to be augmented by a function pointer ?
Yes, I think so.
-antrik-
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, (continued)
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/12
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/12
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/23
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/23
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/29
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/23
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/29
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/23
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/29
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/29
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?,
olafBuddenhagen <=
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/13
- Implicit IN? (was: Interface for SCSI transactions ?), olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/23
- Re: Implicit IN? (was: Interface for SCSI transactions ?), Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/23
- Re: Implicit IN?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/29
- Re: Implicit IN?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/29
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/13
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/13
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/13
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/13
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/09/23