[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ? |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Sep 2011 02:28:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30) |
Thomas Schmitt, le Tue 13 Sep 2011 12:29:43 +0200, a écrit :
> routine device_transact_native(
Why "native"?
> Page 3 of mig.ps says:
> "For variable length arrays an additional count parameter is generated
> to specify how much of the array is actually being used."
>
> So do i have to feed this by two C variables ?
> And what type has the additionally generated count parameter ?
Mmm, I think the simplest way is to just rebuild the kernel with the new
RPC, and look at the generated prototype.
> Serialized structs in byte arrays seem to be the only way to get this,
That's what Mach seems to do for most things, see device_set_status &
co, thread_set_state & co, etc.
Samuel
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, (continued)
- 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
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?,
Samuel Thibault <=
- Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Thomas Schmitt, 2011/09/15
Re: Interface for SCSI transactions ?, Samuel Thibault, 2011/09/05