What should we do about the nvme atomics mess?

[Hannes Reinecke]

On 7/7/25 16:24, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> We could:
>>
>>   I.	 revert the check and the subsequent fixup.  If you really want
>>           to use the nvme atomics you already better pray a lot anyway
>> 	 due to issue 1)
>>   II.	 limit the check to multi-controller subsystems
>>   III.	 don't allow atomics on controllers that only report AWUPF and
>>   	 limit support to controllers that support that more sanely
>> 	 defined NAWUPF
>>
>> I guess for 6.16 we are limited to I. to bring us back to the previous
>> state, but I have a really bad gut feeling about it given the really
>> bad spec language and a lot of low quality NVMe implementations we're
>> seeing these days.
> 
> I like option III. The controler scoped atomic size is broken for all
> the reasons you mentioned, so I vote we not bother trying to make sense
> of it.
> 
Agree. We might consider I. as a fixup for stable, but should continue
with III going forward.

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                  Kernel Storage Architect
hare at suse.de                                +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich