From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ale.deltatee.com (ale.deltatee.com [207.54.116.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3773121959CB2 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 12:33:48 -0700 (PDT) References: <20180830185352.3369-1-logang@deltatee.com> <20180830185352.3369-8-logang@deltatee.com> <20180901082812.GB670@lst.de> <5f79c012-c6e1-56bb-62fd-0689181fb2c9@deltatee.com> <59b28977-8f2a-6228-2050-03fae6bdbedd@kernel.dk> From: Logan Gunthorpe Message-ID: <1b4283da-44df-4a02-3167-e295243cef78@deltatee.com> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 13:33:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <59b28977-8f2a-6228-2050-03fae6bdbedd@kernel.dk> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/13] block: Add PCI P2P flag for request queue and check support for requests List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" To: Jens Axboe , Christoph Hellwig Cc: Alex Williamson , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Jason Gunthorpe , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Bjorn Helgaas , Max Gurtovoy , =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= List-ID: On 05/09/18 01:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 9/3/18 4:26 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: >> I personally agree with Christoph. But if there's consensus in the other >> direction or this is a real blocker moving this forward, I can remove it >> for the next version. > > It's a simple branch because the check isn't exhaustive. It just checks > the first page. At that point you may as well just require the caller to > flag the bio/rq as being P2P, and then do a check for P2P compatibility > with the queue. Hmm, we had something like that in v4[1] but it just seemed redundant to create a flag when the information was already in the bio and kind of ugly for the caller to check for, then set, the flag. I'm not _that_ averse to going back to that though... Logan [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180423233046.21476-8-logang@deltatee.com/T/#u _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm