Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1682759 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-07-07 00:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> - 2017-07-07 00:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-07-07 01:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me> - 2017-07-10 08:00 +0200

#1682759 — Re: [PATCH] NVMe: Added another device ID with stripe quirk

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 04:12:31PM -0600, David Wayne Fugate wrote:
> Adds a fourth Intel controller which has the "stripe" quirk.

NVMe has stadardized a way to communicate this information through
the Namespace Optimal IO Boundary (NOIOB) field in the Identify
Namespace structure, and Keith and Amber at Intel helped to define
this, so please actually implement it in your controllers.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1682779

On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:17:54AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 04:12:31PM -0600, David Wayne Fugate wrote:
> > Adds a fourth Intel controller which has the "stripe" quirk.
> 
> NVMe has stadardized a way to communicate this information through
> the Namespace Optimal IO Boundary (NOIOB) field in the Identify
> Namespace structure, and Keith and Amber at Intel helped to define
> this, so please actually implement it in your controllers.

That's true for all Intel controllers going forward, but this
is actually an older controller that pre-dates NOIOB. It's the exact
same as the 8086:0A54 model, but a particular vendor decided their
rebranded device needs to be made special with a different DID.

We all agree that's a terrible way to go about this for mutliple reasons,
but we can't go back in time to tell the decision makers of this folly. So
I think we need to let this last one go through with the quirk.

Acked-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1682806

On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 06:39:56PM -0400, Keith Busch wrote:
> That's true for all Intel controllers going forward, but this
> is actually an older controller that pre-dates NOIOB. It's the exact
> same as the 8086:0A54 model, but a particular vendor decided their
> rebranded device needs to be made special with a different DID.

Meh..

> 
> We all agree that's a terrible way to go about this for mutliple reasons,
> but we can't go back in time to tell the decision makers of this folly. So
> I think we need to let this last one go through with the quirk.
> 
> Acked-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>

Reluctantly-accepted-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1683969

>> That's true for all Intel controllers going forward, but this
>> is actually an older controller that pre-dates NOIOB. It's the exact
>> same as the 8086:0A54 model, but a particular vendor decided their
>> rebranded device needs to be made special with a different DID.
> 
> Meh..
> 
>>
>> We all agree that's a terrible way to go about this for mutliple reasons,
>> but we can't go back in time to tell the decision makers of this folly. So
>> I think we need to let this last one go through with the quirk.
>>
>> Acked-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
> 
> Reluctantly-accepted-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> 

David, can you resend the patch? For some reason I
can't locate it in my mailbox...

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web