Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 14:04:45 -0700 From: Chuck Tuffli <chuck@tuffli.net> To: Jim Harris <jim.harris@gmail.com> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-scsi <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] CAM pass(4) patch for NVMe Message-ID: <CAM0tzX3LsJ7hGfCb8KWqnVPo5Ja-EU8ED0WsXYgeLpR15%2Be6Ww@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJP=Hc-nZSPw=XuG-EFkA8KePN_BPJyGtacorJXHxUBghpmuaQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAM0tzX2b1NU=y1Vr=XeU63D5=3FJVHPD9e9fLSFaNvQhLtQa=A@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfoTroqgvtwW8fJyquf063cJfdriUfyOqNOy=rx8wM=Qsg@mail.gmail.com> <CAM0tzX0r3VrypNqW0D%2BQRJPO62ogKo1_o3eNg%2BKAYa=yBRMEKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfqtH8AQ=JW8OMYk5VGHTJk6Brchm6OUv9_=ROaD7ZbqfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAM0tzX0paPg9Bg3KJCLLy9kO7v8UzKs%2BigHaOy68Hkgvv9OuOw@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfqJaQ_cAedek5KefyAsQ%2BAn0KUA18_LXtK6z8n13kW5zA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJP=Hc-nZSPw=XuG-EFkA8KePN_BPJyGtacorJXHxUBghpmuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Jim Harris <jim.harris@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Chuck Tuffli <chuck@tuffli.net> wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>> ... >>>> Fair Enough. I'd thought 0xffff was the magic number :). However, you >>>> raise a good point. >>>> >>>> Grep tells me all the xflags are actually unused. So we could use it, >>>> but after chatting with Scott Long, I'm not sure that we should. >>>> >>>> However, I think Jim's idea of having a separate command for commands >>>> for the I/O queue and commands for the admin queue might be the better >>>> part of valor here. I'd initially read Jim's mail as use #defines for >>>> the xflags values, but that's not at all what he was saying. >>>> >>>> The code change would be a bit bigger, but not by a lot. It's super >>>> easy to add new XPT_ function code. >>> >>> OK, I'll head down that path and add a new XPT opcode XPT_NVME_ADMIN >>> and helper macro cam_fill_nvmeadmin() which would be used for Admin >>> commands. The existing XPT_NVME_IO would be used for NVM/IO commands. >>> Both opcodes would use the ccb_nvmeio structure unless there are >>> objections .... ? >> >> Seems reasonable to me. > > Me too. OK, v2 of the patch is up using the new XPT op-code for admin commands instead of the original xflags hack. I tried a couple of passthru commands and it seems to work. --chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAM0tzX3LsJ7hGfCb8KWqnVPo5Ja-EU8ED0WsXYgeLpR15%2Be6Ww>