[PATCH 3/3] tree: add attribute numa_nodes for NVMe path object

[Daniel Wagner]

On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 07:49:41PM +0530, Nilay Shroff wrote:
> Both approaches — either adding a no-cache flag or introducing dedicated
> __no_cached APIs — would work. However, in my opinion, we should aim to 
> use a consistent method across both libnvme 1.x and 2.x versions.

There will be a lot of API changes for 2.x to address all the silly
mistakes. That's way it will be a major version change.

> As we discussed during LSFMM, if we plan to implement an "nvme top" command, 
> we would need non-cached versions of these APIs even for nvme-cli.

Yes, that is why I brought up this discussion. For such a command we
would need non cached versions. And I realize that we would need this
feature also for other commands. So it's not just the queue depth which
changes. Maybe we should just not try to add this feature to 1.x and
rather start the 2.x project.

> So, using the same mechanism for both versions makes sense. Otherwise,
> we’d also have to maintain different logic in nvme top depending on
> the libnvme version, which adds unnecessary complexity.

I don't see a big problem here. Either use the 1.x or 2.x.