From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Marta Rybczynska <mrybczyn@kalray.eu>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
linux-nvme <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Samuel Jones <sjones@kalray.eu>,
Guillaume Missonnier <gmissonnier@kalray.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nvme: allow 64-bit results in passthru commands
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:17:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e639f7ce-5f1a-d4a5-f80e-9bf3bc1ff638@grimberg.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190819185749.GA11202@localhost.localdomain>
>>>> ----- On 16 Aug, 2019, at 15:16, Christoph Hellwig hch@lst.de wrote:
>>>>> Sorry for not replying to the earlier version, and thanks for doing
>>>>> this work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if instead of using our own structure we'd just use
>>>>> a full nvme SQE for the input and CQE for that output. Even if we
>>>>> reserve a few fields that means we are ready for any newly used
>>>>> field (at least until the SQE/CQE sizes are expanded..).
>>>>
>>>> We could do that, nvme_command and nvme_completion are already UAPI.
>>>> On the other hand that would mean not filling out certain fields like
>>>> command_id. Can do an approach like this.
>>>
>>> Well, we need to pass user space addresses and lengths, which isn't
>>> captured in struct nvme_command.
>>
>> Isn't simply having a 64 variant simpler?
>
> Could you provide more details on what you mean by this?
Why would we need to pass addresses and lengths if userspace is
sending the 64 variant when it is expecting a 64 result?
Or maybe I'm missing something...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-19 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-16 9:47 [PATCH v2] nvme: allow 64-bit results in passthru commands Marta Rybczynska
2019-08-16 13:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-19 7:06 ` Marta Rybczynska
2019-08-19 14:49 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-19 15:57 ` James Smart
2019-08-19 18:56 ` Sagi Grimberg
2019-08-19 18:57 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-19 21:17 ` Sagi Grimberg [this message]
2019-08-19 21:21 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-21 23:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-22 0:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-26 11:20 ` Marta Rybczynska
2019-09-02 8:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e639f7ce-5f1a-d4a5-f80e-9bf3bc1ff638@grimberg.me \
--to=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=gmissonnier@kalray.eu \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mrybczyn@kalray.eu \
--cc=sjones@kalray.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).