[PATCH 5/5 v2] nvme: LightNVM support

[Javier González]

Hi,

> On 16 Apr 2015, at 16:55, Keith Busch <keith.busch at intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, Matias Bjørling wrote:
>> @@ -2316,7 +2686,9 @@ static int nvme_dev_add(struct nvme_dev *dev)
>> 	struct nvme_id_ctrl *ctrl;
>> 	void *mem;
>> 	dma_addr_t dma_addr;
>> -	int shift = NVME_CAP_MPSMIN(readq(&dev->bar->cap)) + 12;
>> +	u64 cap = readq(&dev->bar->cap);
>> +	int shift = NVME_CAP_MPSMIN(cap) + 12;
>> +	int nvm_cmdset = NVME_CAP_NVM(cap);
> 
> The controller capabilities' command sets supported used here is the
> right way to key off on support for this new command set, IMHO, but I do
> not see in this patch the command set being selected when the controller
> is enabled
> 
> Also if we're going this route, I think we need to define this reserved
> bit in the spec, but I'm not sure how to help with that.
> 
>> @@ -2332,6 +2704,7 @@ static int nvme_dev_add(struct nvme_dev *dev)
>> 	ctrl = mem;
>> 	nn = le32_to_cpup(&ctrl->nn);
>> 	dev->oncs = le16_to_cpup(&ctrl->oncs);
>> +	dev->oacs = le16_to_cpup(&ctrl->oacs);
> 
> I don't find OACS used anywhere in the rest of the patch. I think this
> must be left over from v1.
> 
> Otherwise it looks pretty good to me, but I think it would be cleaner if
> the lightnvm stuff is not mixed in the same file with the standard nvme
> command set. We might end up splitting nvme-core in the future anyway
> for command sets and transports.

Would you be ok with having nvme-lightnvm for LightNVM specific
commands?

Javier.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/attachments/20150416/ef38b819/attachment.sig>