> On 19 Feb 2018, at 08.31, Matias Bjørling <mb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 02/16/2018 07:48 AM, Javier Gonzalez wrote: >>> On 15 Feb 2018, at 05.11, Matias Bjørling <mb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> The value of max_phys_sect is always static. Instead of >>> defining it in the nvm_dev_ops structure, declare it as a global >>> value. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matias Bjørling <mb@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/lightnvm/core.c | 28 +++++++--------------------- >>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-init.c | 9 ++++----- >>> drivers/lightnvm/pblk-recovery.c | 8 ++------ >>> drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c | 5 +---- >>> include/linux/lightnvm.h | 5 ++--- >>> 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) >> The patch looks good, but I have a question. If a target implements the >> scalar interface, then it will not be limited to 64 lbas/ppas and it >> will not make sense to split the bio base don this value. In fact, it >> looks like in time, we will move to a scalar interface in the 2.0 path >> to align with the zoned interface, so this value will be dependent on >> whether the target is using the scalar or vector interface. > > Both read/write and vector interface will coexist. I am only removing > what is hardwired into the specification. > > The read/write interface has always been able issue more than 64 LBAs, > it is instead limited by what the hardware reports its max transfer > size to be. > Exactly. I was thinking of a similar mechanism for the vector interface to simplify integration with the scalar interface and avoid having an if/else for what we now call max_phys_sect. I guess we can wait and see what the code looks like when we adapt pblk. Reviewed-by: Javier González <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Javier
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
