From: "Matias Bjørling" <mb@lightnvm.io>
To: javier@cnexlabs.com
Cc: igor.j.konopko@intel.com, marcin.dziegielewski@intel.com,
hans.holmberg@cnexlabs.com, hlitz@ucsc.edu,
youngtack.jin@circuitblvd.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: move device L2P detection to core
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 14:37:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9349be00-4d14-9b25-ed11-fb9244428d7f@lightnvm.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31319710-8A72-49DC-9CFA-521CA06843F3@cnexlabs.com>
On 08/03/2018 02:16 PM, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>> On 3 Aug 2018, at 10.54, Matias Bjørling <mb@lightnvm.io> wrote:
>>
>> A 1.2 device is able to manage the logical to physical mapping
>> table internally or leave it to the host.
>>
>> A target only supports one of those approaches, and therefore must
>> check on initialization. Move this check to core to avoid each target
>> implement the check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matias Bjørling <mb@lightnvm.io>
>> ---
>
>
> I see where you want to go with these changes, but the way targets are
> layered on top of the LightNVM subsystem does not align with it.
> LightNVM can support different OCSSD versions and capabilities, but that
> does not mean that a target (e.g., pblk) does. The way I see it, core
> should only check for (i) the drive to expose itself in a known revision
> and (ii) the reported structures to be consistent. However, specific
> functionality is not for core to check upo.
Why try to initialize a target, if we already know that it is incompatible?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-03 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-03 8:54 [PATCH] lightnvm: move device L2P detection to core Matias Bjørling
2018-08-03 12:16 ` Javier Gonzalez
2018-08-03 12:37 ` Matias Bjørling [this message]
2018-08-03 12:40 ` Javier Gonzalez
2018-08-03 12:43 ` Matias Bjørling
2018-08-03 12:55 ` Javier Gonzalez
2018-08-03 13:01 ` Matias Bjørling
2018-08-03 13:19 ` Javier Gonzalez
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=9349be00-4d14-9b25-ed11-fb9244428d7f@lightnvm.io \
--to=mb@lightnvm.io \
--cc=hans.holmberg@cnexlabs.com \
--cc=hlitz@ucsc.edu \
--cc=igor.j.konopko@intel.com \
--cc=javier@cnexlabs.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcin.dziegielewski@intel.com \
--cc=youngtack.jin@circuitblvd.com \
/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).