[PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
spec which is not open

Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification

This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.

Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
---
Changes in v2:
  - clarified JEDEC references;
  - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
  - clarified reserved block references

 content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex
index 9232d5c..804383a 100644
--- a/content.tex
+++ b/content.tex
@@ -4668,14 +4668,28 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Ope
 };
 \end{lstlisting}
 
-The device lifetime metrics \field{pre_eol_info}, \field{device_lifetime_est_a}
-and \field{device_lifetime_est_b} have the semantics described by the JESD84-B50
-specification for the extended CSD register fields \field{PRE_EOL_INFO}
-\field{DEVICE_LIFETIME_EST_TYP_A} and \field{DEVICE_LIFETIME_EST_TYP_B}
-respectively.
+The \field{pre_eol_info} specifies the percentage of reserved blocks
+that are consumed and will have one of these values:
 
-JESD84-B50 is available at the JEDEC website (https://www.jedec.org)
-pursuant to JEDEC's licensing terms and conditions.
+\begin{lstlisting}
+/* Value not available */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_UNDEFINED    0
+/* < 80% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_NORMAL       1
+/* 80% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_WARNING      2
+/* 90% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_URGENT       3
+/* All others values are reserved */
+\end{lstlisting}
+
+The \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_a} refers to wear of SLC cells and is provided
+in increments of 10%, with 0 meaning undefined, 1 meaning up-to 10% of lifetime
+used, and so on, thru to 11 meaning estimated lifetime exceeded.
+All values above 11 are reserved.
+
+The \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_b} refers to wear of MLC cells and is provided
+with the same semantics as \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_a}.
 
 The final \field{status} byte is written by the device: either
 VIRTIO_BLK_S_OK for success, VIRTIO_BLK_S_IOERR for device or driver
@@ -4812,7 +4826,17 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Ope
 or UFS persistent storage), the device SHOULD offer the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME
 flag. The flag MUST NOT be offered if the device is backed by storage for which
 the lifetime metrics described in this document cannot be obtained or for which
-such metrics have no useful meaning.
+such metrics have no useful meaning. If the metrics are offered, the device MUST NOT
+send any reserved values, as defined in this specification.
+
+\begin{note}
+  The device lifetime metrics \field{pre_eol_info}, \field{device_lifetime_est_a}
+  and \field{device_lifetime_est_b} are discussed in the JESD84-B50 specification.
+
+  The complete JESD84-B50 is available at the JEDEC website (https://www.jedec.org)
+  pursuant to JEDEC's licensing terms and conditions. This information is provided to
+  simplfy passthrough implementations from eMMC devices.
+\end{note}
 
 \subsubsection{Legacy Interface: Device Operation}\label{sec:Device Types / Block Device / Device Operation / Legacy Interface: Device Operation}
 When using the legacy interface, transitional devices and drivers
-- 
2.31.1.527.g47e6f16901-goog

[virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
lifetime metrics
To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
<linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>


In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
spec which is not open

Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification

This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.

Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
---
Changes in v2:
  - clarified JEDEC references;
  - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
  - clarified reserved block references

 content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex
index 9232d5c..804383a 100644
--- a/content.tex
+++ b/content.tex
@@ -4668,14 +4668,28 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device
Types / Block Device / Device Ope
 };
 \end{lstlisting}

-The device lifetime metrics \field{pre_eol_info}, \field{device_lifetime_est_a}
-and \field{device_lifetime_est_b} have the semantics described by the
JESD84-B50
-specification for the extended CSD register fields \field{PRE_EOL_INFO}
-\field{DEVICE_LIFETIME_EST_TYP_A} and \field{DEVICE_LIFETIME_EST_TYP_B}
-respectively.
+The \field{pre_eol_info} specifies the percentage of reserved blocks
+that are consumed and will have one of these values:

-JESD84-B50 is available at the JEDEC website (https://www.jedec.org)
-pursuant to JEDEC's licensing terms and conditions.
+\begin{lstlisting}
+/* Value not available */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_UNDEFINED    0
+/* < 80% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_NORMAL       1
+/* 80% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_WARNING      2
+/* 90% of reserved blocks are consumed */
+#define VIRTIO_BLK_PRE_EOL_INFO_URGENT       3
+/* All others values are reserved */
+\end{lstlisting}
+
+The \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_a} refers to wear of SLC cells and
is provided
+in increments of 10%, with 0 meaning undefined, 1 meaning up-to 10% of lifetime
+used, and so on, thru to 11 meaning estimated lifetime exceeded.
+All values above 11 are reserved.
+
+The \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_b} refers to wear of MLC cells and
is provided
+with the same semantics as \field{device_lifetime_est_typ_a}.

 The final \field{status} byte is written by the device: either
 VIRTIO_BLK_S_OK for success, VIRTIO_BLK_S_IOERR for device or driver
@@ -4812,7 +4826,17 @@ \subsection{Device Operation}\label{sec:Device
Types / Block Device / Device Ope
 or UFS persistent storage), the device SHOULD offer the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME
 flag. The flag MUST NOT be offered if the device is backed by storage for which
 the lifetime metrics described in this document cannot be obtained or for which
-such metrics have no useful meaning.
+such metrics have no useful meaning. If the metrics are offered, the
device MUST NOT
+send any reserved values, as defined in this specification.
+
+\begin{note}
+  The device lifetime metrics \field{pre_eol_info},
\field{device_lifetime_est_a}
+  and \field{device_lifetime_est_b} are discussed in the JESD84-B50
specification.
+
+  The complete JESD84-B50 is available at the JEDEC website
(https://www.jedec.org)
+  pursuant to JEDEC's licensing terms and conditions. This
information is provided to
+  simplfy passthrough implementations from eMMC devices.
+\end{note}

 \subsubsection{Legacy Interface: Device Operation}\label{sec:Device
Types / Block Device / Device Operation / Legacy Interface: Device
Operation}
 When using the legacy interface, transitional devices and drivers
--
2.31.1.527.g47e6f16901-goog

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, 5 May 2021 13:37:26 -0600
Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> lifetime metrics
> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> 
> 
> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> spec which is not open
> 
> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> 
> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - clarified JEDEC references;
>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
>   - clarified reserved block references
> 
>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Do we have a consent here? I see the mails are not showing up on all of
the lists, so I'm a bit confused regarding the state of this...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

I believe the proposal was Acked-By and didn't receive any strong pushback

The only open point of discussion was whether to rename the feature
flag to F_EMMC_LIFETIME in order to open the door for F_NVME_LIFETIME
I think, but I didn't hear any comment on that

Thanks,
- Enrico

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 4:33 AM Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 13:37:26 -0600
> Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> > Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> > lifetime metrics
> > To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> > <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> > <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> >
> >
> > In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> > original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> > spec which is not open
> >
> > Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> > added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> > make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> > metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> >
> > This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> > any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> > clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> >   - clarified JEDEC references;
> >   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
> >   - clarified reserved block references
> >
> >  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> Do we have a consent here? I see the mails are not showing up on all of
> the lists, so I'm a bit confused regarding the state of this...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2294 bytes --]

Friendly ping here. Since no further feedback, would it make sense to set
up a vote on this proposal?

Thanks,
- Enrico


On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 9:55 AM Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> I believe the proposal was Acked-By and didn't receive any strong pushback
>
> The only open point of discussion was whether to rename the feature
> flag to F_EMMC_LIFETIME in order to open the door for F_NVME_LIFETIME
> I think, but I didn't hear any comment on that
>
> Thanks,
> - Enrico
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 4:33 AM Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 5 May 2021 13:37:26 -0600
> > Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > > Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> > > Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> > > lifetime metrics
> > > To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > > Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> > > <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> > > <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> > >
> > >
> > > In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> > > original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> > > spec which is not open
> > >
> > > Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> > > added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> > > make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> > > metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> > >
> > > This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> > > any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> > > clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v2:
> > >   - clarified JEDEC references;
> > >   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
> > >   - clarified reserved block references
> > >
> > >  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > Do we have a consent here? I see the mails are not showing up on all of
> > the lists, so I'm a bit confused regarding the state of this...
> >
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3756 bytes --]

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1512 bytes --]

On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Enrico Granata wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> lifetime metrics
> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> 
> 
> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> spec which is not open
> 
> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> 
> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - clarified JEDEC references;
>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
>   - clarified reserved block references
> 
>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Ping?

Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, Jul 14 2021, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Enrico Granata wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
>> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
>> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
>> lifetime metrics
>> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
>> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
>> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
>> 
>> 
>> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
>> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
>> spec which is not open
>> 
>> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
>> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
>> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
>> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
>> 
>> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
>> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
>> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>>   - clarified JEDEC references;
>>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
>>   - clarified reserved block references
>> 
>>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> Ping?
>
> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

[Enrico is currently on leave of absence]

Is there any outstanding feedback from the linux-block folks? I've lost
track of this, I'm afraid. (Your R-b is the only feedback I see on this
list...)

We can certainly put up a vote. This is one of the things I wanted to
see fixed for the next release of the standard.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2336 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:36:58AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14 2021, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Enrico Granata wrote:
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> >> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> >> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> >> lifetime metrics
> >> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> >> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> >> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> >> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> >> spec which is not open
> >> 
> >> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> >> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> >> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> >> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> >> 
> >> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> >> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> >> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> >> ---
> >> Changes in v2:
> >>   - clarified JEDEC references;
> >>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
> >>   - clarified reserved block references
> >> 
> >>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > Ping?
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> 
> [Enrico is currently on leave of absence]
> 
> Is there any outstanding feedback from the linux-block folks? I've lost
> track of this, I'm afraid. (Your R-b is the only feedback I see on this
> list...)
> 
> We can certainly put up a vote. This is one of the things I wanted to
> see fixed for the next release of the standard.

I have CCed Christoph, linux-block@, and virtualization@. Here is the
link to the patch that we're discussing:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20210505193655.2414268-1-egranata@google.com/

Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2336 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:36:58AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14 2021, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Enrico Granata wrote:
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> >> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> >> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> >> lifetime metrics
> >> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> >> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> >> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> >> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> >> spec which is not open
> >> 
> >> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> >> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> >> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> >> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> >> 
> >> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> >> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> >> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> >> ---
> >> Changes in v2:
> >>   - clarified JEDEC references;
> >>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
> >>   - clarified reserved block references
> >> 
> >>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > Ping?
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> 
> [Enrico is currently on leave of absence]
> 
> Is there any outstanding feedback from the linux-block folks? I've lost
> track of this, I'm afraid. (Your R-b is the only feedback I see on this
> list...)
> 
> We can certainly put up a vote. This is one of the things I wanted to
> see fixed for the next release of the standard.

I have CCed Christoph, linux-block@, and virtualization@. Here is the
link to the patch that we're discussing:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20210505193655.2414268-1-egranata@google.com/

Stefan

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

Hi folks,
I am back from my leave of absence, so thank you everyone for your patience

This proposal has been outstanding for a while and didn't seem to
receive pushback, especially compared to the initial proposal

Would it be the right time to put this modification up for a vote?

Thanks,
- Enrico

Thanks,
- Enrico


On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 8:25 AM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 11:36:58AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 14 2021, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:37:26PM -0700, Enrico Granata wrote:
> > >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >> From: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > >> Date: Wed, May 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM
> > >> Subject: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk
> > >> lifetime metrics
> > >> To: <virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>
> > >> Cc: <egranata@google.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <mst@redhat.com>,
> > >> <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
> > >> <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> In the course of review, some concerns were surfaced about the
> > >> original virtio-blk lifetime proposal, as it depends on the eMMC
> > >> spec which is not open
> > >>
> > >> Add a more detailed description of the meaning of the fields
> > >> added by that proposal to the virtio-blk specification, as to
> > >> make it feasible to understand and implement the new lifetime
> > >> metrics feature without needing to refer to JEDEC's specification
> > >>
> > >> This patch does not change the meaning of those fields nor add
> > >> any new fields, but it is intended to provide an open and more
> > >> clear description of the meaning associated with those fields.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> Changes in v2:
> > >>   - clarified JEDEC references;
> > >>   - added VIRTIO_BLK prefix and cleaned up comment syntax;
> > >>   - clarified reserved block references
> > >>
> > >>  content.tex | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > >>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Ping?
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> >
> > [Enrico is currently on leave of absence]
> >
> > Is there any outstanding feedback from the linux-block folks? I've lost
> > track of this, I'm afraid. (Your R-b is the only feedback I see on this
> > list...)
> >
> > We can certainly put up a vote. This is one of the things I wanted to
> > see fixed for the next release of the standard.
>
> I have CCed Christoph, linux-block@, and virtualization@. Here is the
> link to the patch that we're discussing:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-block/patch/20210505193655.2414268-1-egranata@google.com/
>
> Stefan

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I am back from my leave of absence, so thank you everyone for your patience
>
> This proposal has been outstanding for a while and didn't seem to
> receive pushback, especially compared to the initial proposal
>
> Would it be the right time to put this modification up for a vote?

I guess no news is good news? (Or it fell through the cracks for everybody...)

I can update #106 and start voting.

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I am back from my leave of absence, so thank you everyone for your patience
>
> This proposal has been outstanding for a while and didn't seem to
> receive pushback, especially compared to the initial proposal
>
> Would it be the right time to put this modification up for a vote?

I guess no news is good news? (Or it fell through the cracks for everybody...)

I can update #106 and start voting.

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I am back from my leave of absence, so thank you everyone for your patience
>
> This proposal has been outstanding for a while and didn't seem to
> receive pushback, especially compared to the initial proposal
>
> Would it be the right time to put this modification up for a vote?

I guess no news is good news? (Or it fell through the cracks for everybody...)

I can update #106 and start voting.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

I would very much favor that - thanks for bringing this thread back to attention

Thanks,
- Enrico

Thanks,
- Enrico


On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 5:54 AM Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> > I am back from my leave of absence, so thank you everyone for your patience
> >
> > This proposal has been outstanding for a while and didn't seem to
> > receive pushback, especially compared to the initial proposal
> >
> > Would it be the right time to put this modification up for a vote?
>
> I guess no news is good news? (Or it fell through the cracks for everybody...)
>
> I can update #106 and start voting.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> I would very much favor that - thanks for bringing this thread back to attention

Merged now, thank you for your patience.

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> I would very much favor that - thanks for bringing this thread back to attention

Merged now, thank you for your patience.

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:

> I would very much favor that - thanks for bringing this thread back to attention

Merged now, thank you for your patience.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org

Re: [virtio-dev] Fwd: [PATCH v2] Provide detailed specification of virtio-blk lifetime metrics

[Enrico Granata]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 422 bytes --]

Excellent thank you. I will send out an up-to-date kernel patch once I am
back from my current leave (ETA within November)

Thanks,
- Enrico


On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 9:37 AM Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Enrico Granata <egranata@google.com> wrote:
>
> > I would very much favor that - thanks for bringing this thread back to
> attention
>
> Merged now, thank you for your patience.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 902 bytes --]