lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v11 8/9] nvmet-passthru: Add enable/disable helpers
From
Date

>>> +    if (subsys->ver < NVME_VS(1, 2, 1)) {
>>> +        pr_warn("nvme controller version is too old: %d.%d.%d,
>>> advertising 1.2.1\n",
>>> +            (int)NVME_MAJOR(subsys->ver),
>>> +            (int)NVME_MINOR(subsys->ver),
>>> +            (int)NVME_TERTIARY(subsys->ver));
>>> +        subsys->ver = NVME_VS(1, 2, 1);
>>
>> Umm.. is this OK? do we implement the mandatory 1.2.1 features on behalf
>> of the passthru device?
>
> This was the approach that Christoph suggested. It seemed sensible to
> me. However, it would also *probably* be ok to just reject these
> devices. Unless you feel strongly about this, I'll probably leave it the
> way it is.

Sounds ok to me.

>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    mutex_unlock(&subsys->lock);
>>> +    return 0;
>>> +
>>> +out_put_ctrl:
>>> +    nvme_put_ctrl(ctrl);
>>> +out_unlock:
>>> +    mutex_unlock(&subsys->lock);
>>> +    return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void __nvmet_passthru_ctrl_disable(struct nvmet_subsys *subsys)
>>> +{
>>> +    if (subsys->passthru_ctrl) {
>>> +        xa_erase(&passthru_subsystems, subsys->passthru_ctrl->cntlid);
>>> +        nvme_put_ctrl(subsys->passthru_ctrl);
>>> +    }
>>> +    subsys->passthru_ctrl = NULL;
>>> +    subsys->ver = NVMET_DEFAULT_VS;
>>> +}
>>
>> Isn't it strange that a subsystem changes its version in its lifetime?
>
> It does seem strange. However, it's not at all unprecedented. See
> nvmet_subsys_attr_version_store() which gives the user direct control of
> the version through configfs.

You're right.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-28 00:14    [W:0.057 / U:5.888 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site