lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 RFC 2/2] nvme: improve performance for virtual NVMe devices
From
Date
On Mon, 2016-08-15 at 22:41 -0300, Helen Koike wrote:


>  
> +struct nvme_doorbell_memory {
> + __u8 opcode;
> + __u8 flags;
> + __u16 command_id;
> + __u32 rsvd1[5];
> + __le64 prp1;
> + __le64 prp2;
> + __u32 rsvd12[6];
> +};
> +
>  struct nvme_command {
>   union {
>   struct nvme_common_command common;
> @@ -845,6 +858,7 @@ struct nvme_command {
>   struct nvmf_connect_command connect;
>   struct nvmf_property_set_command prop_set;
>   struct nvmf_property_get_command prop_get;
> + struct nvme_doorbell_memory doorbell_memory;
>   };
>  };

This looks like a new NVMe command being introduced, not found in the
latest NVMe specs (NVMe 1.2.1 spec or NVMe-over-Fabrics 1.0 spec)?

This is a big NACK, the command needs to be part of the NVMe standard
before adding it to the NVMe code base (this is exactly how NVMe-over-
Fabrics standard got implemented).  I would bring your proposal to
nvmexpress.org.

Jay


>  
> @@ -934,6 +948,9 @@ enum {
>   /*
>    * Media and Data Integrity Errors:
>    */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NVME_VDB
> + NVME_SC_DOORBELL_MEMORY_INVALID = 0x1C0,
> +#endif
>   NVME_SC_WRITE_FAULT = 0x280,
>   NVME_SC_READ_ERROR = 0x281,
>   NVME_SC_GUARD_CHECK = 0x282,

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:57    [W:0.054 / U:13.176 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site