On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 06:16:45AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote: > > So we could return the nvmedev from _nvme_connect_subsys() but I don't know if > > this a good idea. > > IMO, it is a good idea to make _nvme_connect_subsys() return the device. The > similar function _nvmet_passthru_target_connect() does that, so it is another > small goodness to have consistency between the two. Sure, I'll look into this when I remove the udev trigger filter code again which resulted in this series. But let's get this series sorted out first. > > FWIW, it would also fix the current problem we face with > > nvme/047 which seems to lack the second _find_nvme_dev() call. > > I posted the fix patch for the nvme/047 problem reflecting your comments. I hope > that fix settled before further refactoring. Yep, let's get the bug fix in first. > It is a fun to see the much of the boiler plates go away with the > series :) Ineed, makes the test way smaller. BTW, what do you think about removing nvme/006 and nvme/007? They are basically doing nothing anymore except setting up a target with either device or file backing. We exercise this code now in all the other tests. So this is bit redundant IMO. > Thanks. I provided two minor comments on the 5th patch and 10th patch. Other > than that, this series looks good to me. Also I did another trial run, and > saw no regression. Good. I've updated the series accordingly. Let me run a quick test and then I post the update.
