On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 03:57:55PM -0500, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Feb 2022, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 05:15:34PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 08:06:33AM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 06:01:13AM +0000, Adam Manzanares wrote: > > > > > BTW I think having the target code be able to implement simple copy without > > > > > moving data over the fabric would be a great way of showing off the command. > > > > > > > > Do you mean this should be implemented instead as a fabrics backend > > > > instead because fabrics already instantiates and creates a virtual > > > > nvme device? And so this would mean less code? > > > > > > It would be a lot less code. In fact I don't think we need any new code > > > at all. Just using nvme-loop on top of null_blk or brd should be all > > > that is needed. > > > > Mikulas, > > > > That begs the question why add this instead of using null_blk with > > nvme-loop? > > > > Luis > > I think that nvme-debug (the patch 3) doesn't have to be added to the > kernel. > > Nvme-debug was an old student project that was canceled. I used it because > it was very easy to add copy offload functionality to it - adding this > capability took just one function with 43 lines of code (nvme_debug_copy). > BTW Kanchan's group has looked at adding copy offload support to the target. I'll let him respond on the timing of upstreaming, I'm under the assumption that it is also a relatively small patch to the target code. > I don't know if someone is interested in continuing the development of > nvme-debug. If yes, I can continue the development, if not, we can just > drop it. > > Mikulas >
