linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_scsi: Implement fc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:05:00 +0800
From:   Fam Zheng <famz@...hat.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        stefanha@...hat.com, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_scsi: Implement fc_host

On Tue, 01/17 14:17, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 16/01/2017 18:26, Fam Zheng wrote:
> >> Is the endianness correct for big-endian host here?
> >
> > I think so. The fc_host sysfs uses u64 to represent port_name and node_name,
> > this patch does the same, so using virtio_* helpers for these fields should
> > handle the endianness correctly.
> 
> I was suspicious about it because they are defined as "u8 x[8]" in the
> virtio_scsi_config struct.  So you would need to read with
> virtio_cread_bytes and pass the result to wwn_to_u64.
> 
> For example, if you have 0x500123456789abcd this would be
> 
> 	0x50 0x01 0x23 0x45 0x67 0x89 0xab 0cd
> 
> in virtio_scsi_config, and then virtio_cread64 would read it as a
> little-endian u64, 0xcdab896745230150.  Maybe your QEMU patch is also
> writing things as little-endian 64-bit integers, rather than 8-element
> arrays of bytes?

Yes, they all used 64-bit integers in a "less surprising" endian. I think there
is an endianness conecpt to WWN, as in 0x500123456789abcd; and there is an
native endianness to virtio, which is little-endian. If we use a "u8 x[8]" type
in the spec and want the WWN's MSB, namely the 0x50 stuff, to be the first byte,
is it worth to explicitly document that to avoid confusion?

Fam