Re: [PATCH v20 07/12] nvme: add copy offload support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/06/24 08:22AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 03:50:20PM +0530, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
+	if (blk_rq_nr_phys_segments(req) != BLK_COPY_MAX_SEGMENTS)
+		return BLK_STS_IOERR;

This sounds like BLK_COPY_MAX_SEGMENTS is misnamed.  Right now this is
not a max segments, but the exact number of segments required.

We will move this check to block layer, with name
BLK_COPY_TOTAL_SEGMENTS.

 /*
  * Recommended frequency for KATO commands per NVMe 1.4 section 7.12.1:
- *
+ *

Please submit this whitespace fix separately.

diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 8b1edb46880a..1c5974bb23d5 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -1287,6 +1287,7 @@ static inline unsigned int bdev_discard_granularity(struct block_device *bdev)

 /* maximum copy offload length, this is set to 128MB based on current testing */
 #define BLK_COPY_MAX_BYTES		(1 << 27)
+#define BLK_COPY_MAX_SEGMENTS		2

... and this doesn't belong into a NVMe patch.  I'd also expect that
the block layer would verify this before sending of the request to the driver.

Acked

diff --git a/include/linux/nvme.h b/include/linux/nvme.h
index 425573202295..5275a0962a02 100644
--- a/include/linux/nvme.h
+++ b/include/linux/nvme.h

Note that we've usually kept adding new protocol bits to nvme.h separate
from the implementation in the host or target code.

Acked, will move it to a separate patch.

Thank you,
Nitesh Shetty





[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux