From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org>
Received: from mail-oi0-x232.google.com (mail-oi0-x232.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::232])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBC3E820F6
 for <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 14:49:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-x232.google.com with SMTP id w204so16632988oiw.0
 for <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 14:49:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9d96b4d3-0571-c859-92e8-8e013206a301@hpe.com>
References: <cover.1486750246.git.linda.knippers@hpe.com>
 <5d86cd3620ca9eb3cda38cce0401b2984526cad7.1486750247.git.linda.knippers@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4gRNeuQFwDtwGzBbs+CKZnkYibCMm0UXCD2ZWyOZN0GJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <58A1F84A.2090605@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4iW8Kwvm9dFgM7se6kQ7ZOXqX89hz7=FhOrpAbcCEcgAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <58A4E20F.8040302@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4iog-kV3-Bu2KYzC7hxkAO82mbUfY-nyYdEXReJC8nioQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <58A4F63D.70908@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4i8GSU13GZBta+YH0NfVcDztLy2SjfNJmtdpjs+7igULQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <56cd91c8-a5d8-7339-2ff2-f2e706691c8b@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4ggMwddnkHxAkLkSHLpM6h6t3zJQ3mr2P4t+6xPZx0dxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <58A607F2.6030904@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4gpmz-1E23pHdoy49k+CWXBb-m-7PRbBOb18xTgyhcbUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4jdDrZzzVx5+uSb2tHg4MvqWeyzMXunq3F3L6dzYaBOyw@mail.gmail.com>
 <fbc7faf0-e759-0db3-edfe-c32ec453e696@hpe.com>
 <CAPcyv4j=vmjNgY8rzWTnWpyp3TFk5YbDeHupX99SMZQb-gi=EQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <9d96b4d3-0571-c859-92e8-8e013206a301@hpe.com>
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 14:49:53 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gL3GCT6YnfOWpRG23vvmkf+ctZKXeXqGKrsJucKCxKqA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Allow all supported HPE DSM functions to be called
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/options/linux-nvdimm>,
 <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm>,
 <mailto:linux-nvdimm-request@lists.01.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org
Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" <linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org>
To: Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@hpe.com>
Cc: "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>
List-ID: <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Linda Knippers <linda.knippers@hpe.com> wrote:
>>> Several problems.
>>> That family is documented for RFIC 0x0201.
>>> No NVDIMM-N platform supports that DSM family.
>>> When platforms do support 0x0201, some will also support NVDIMM-N.  Since
>>> opcodes are not documented, how do would they not step on each other?
>>>
>>> I don't think that works at all.
>>>
>>
>> I'm confused there is no correlation between FIC and DSM family,
>
>
> Page 7 of version 1.3 of your DSM spec says:
>
> Platforms that have the _DSM interface implemented, as outlined in this
> section, can support a NVDIMM region with Region Format Interface Code
> (RFIC) of 0x0201.
>
> Other DSM documents reference RFIC 0x0101.
>
>> at least not one Linux enforces.
>
>
> That is true, but FW developers aren't being as loose.

Yes, they are. We have 3 0x101 DSM families.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm