From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Smart Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] nvme-fabrics: Add NVME FC Transport support to lpfc Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:41:51 -0700 Message-ID: References: <5792b920.7v71BUERlAKN8sK4%james.smart@broadcom.com> <20160811212406.GI18013@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.220.44]:35036 "EHLO mail-pa0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756116AbcHVRly (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:41:54 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id hb8so21045311pac.2 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:41:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160811212406.GI18013@infradead.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On 8/11/2016 2:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 05:24:00PM -0700, James Smart wrote: >> This patchset adds NVME support to the lpfc FC driver. It reworks >> the core driver for both NVME and SCSI protocol support, then adds the >> nvme-over-fabrics host and target interfaces which connect to the >> NVME FC transport lower-level api. >> >> Patches are cut against the linux-nvme for-4.8/drivers branch > Before reviewing the details: what's the plan for merging this as we'll > have dependencies on both the SCSI and the block tree? Good question. With the first round of lpfc patches, I tried to ensure we had all the cross-protocol infrastructure in place such that the driver can have 2 halves that effectively run independently. I'm hoping it means that I can submit scsi stuff independent from nvme stuff, but we'll have to see how it goes over time. I'm open to suggestions on how best to manage the 2 trees - e.g. scsi stuff goes in scsi tree, and if a dependency then has to be pulled into block ? nvme stuff only to block. The initial lpfc patch set should have all the scsi infrastructure pulled into the 4.8 merge, so hopefully that dependency has been resolved already. -- james Any recommendations ? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: james.smart@broadcom.com (James Smart) Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 10:41:51 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 0/3] nvme-fabrics: Add NVME FC Transport support to lpfc In-Reply-To: <20160811212406.GI18013@infradead.org> References: <5792b920.7v71BUERlAKN8sK4%james.smart@broadcom.com> <20160811212406.GI18013@infradead.org> Message-ID: On 8/11/2016 2:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016@05:24:00PM -0700, James Smart wrote: >> This patchset adds NVME support to the lpfc FC driver. It reworks >> the core driver for both NVME and SCSI protocol support, then adds the >> nvme-over-fabrics host and target interfaces which connect to the >> NVME FC transport lower-level api. >> >> Patches are cut against the linux-nvme for-4.8/drivers branch > Before reviewing the details: what's the plan for merging this as we'll > have dependencies on both the SCSI and the block tree? Good question. With the first round of lpfc patches, I tried to ensure we had all the cross-protocol infrastructure in place such that the driver can have 2 halves that effectively run independently. I'm hoping it means that I can submit scsi stuff independent from nvme stuff, but we'll have to see how it goes over time. I'm open to suggestions on how best to manage the 2 trees - e.g. scsi stuff goes in scsi tree, and if a dependency then has to be pulled into block ? nvme stuff only to block. The initial lpfc patch set should have all the scsi infrastructure pulled into the 4.8 merge, so hopefully that dependency has been resolved already. -- james Any recommendations ?