From owner-freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Wed Jun 10 21:33:02 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916D9340158; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 21:33:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ctuffli@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pj1-f48.google.com (mail-pj1-f48.google.com [209.85.216.48]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49j0b15xcsz4bYh; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 21:33:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ctuffli@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pj1-f48.google.com with SMTP id i4so1452850pjd.0; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:33:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=4XNBCSL33xik9a3SlnMw/eRS3nqjYX+P0V0G3ILvqMI=; b=iNK0/0E48ypAC/iL5vQHus376n4AaIaVrUf35TrwWSTmVV0BZUAP13IVNfeKAwJv0t rWDOetXG4RjRl4Vgyy9eBjoCRoaUD7aLXJrBZyc/CyG7StfnqhXuQp4q0IstI4W1s3Oh RoIYBu5pOeejZymh6UKRvRCbCJjX8Y1wnzQD/1739OWjZPolHlW6tP9/FfTX2/DRZPEj lcbd1Pn6ntohWcWjCIM6o8aVMYeF9TAhsJee0zpTQlIrfrvERqddXVL2zFWoMIEyA4+G Gqkjr/Y/Gg0QkHQva7mZj6vviJ5V4UKA7ny71tTi9eM0oxe4qkVjuKpBBrzsMsfNB0qM 2enw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ib9JsZYQMT9aZ/rE+Vxe6DoDpPemGoZwVEjgxN8TLxeboqeCP UdINDNGedc5iqqPUCt3NBC05BVjR X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxJvOmrsVDDRDAN7OR/ISzOdLrdXJ4rJzfLmLftJPtyC1xx0W3hGVPMkYy9cxO2+Qo+cChNSw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:aa02:: with SMTP id be2mr4524939plb.48.1591824779852; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf1-f178.google.com (mail-pf1-f178.google.com. [209.85.210.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gm11sm626395pjb.9.2020.06.10.14.32.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:32:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-f178.google.com with SMTP id z63so751079pfb.1; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:32:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a63:6704:: with SMTP id b4mr4338835pgc.419.1591824779297; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:32:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Chuck Tuffli Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 14:32:48 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Updates to bhyve NVMe emulation To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org, freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49j0b15xcsz4bYh X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ctuffli@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ctuffli@gmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.98 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[209.85.216.48:from]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.03)[0.031]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.98)[-0.983]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.02)[-1.024]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[209.85.216.48:from]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[chuck@freebsd.org,ctuffli@gmail.com]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[chuck@freebsd.org,ctuffli@gmail.com] X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 21:33:02 -0000 On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 2:12 PM Chuck Tuffli wrote: > > In an effort to provide better NVMe emulation in bhyve, I've started > running the NVM Express Compliance tests against the bhyve emulation > and fixing issues the tests find. The tests are part of the University > of New Hampshire (UNH) Interoperability Lab (IOL) suite. > > I have posted a series of patches in Phabricator and would appreciate > any feedback people might have. And because there are a few changes, > the plan is to leave them up for review longer than I normally do. > Note that I've cross-posted to the SCSI list to possibly pick up NVMe > expertise. Summary of the patch series with links to differential > reviews: Thank you to those who have tested this patch series. Note there is still time to review these changes if you are interested. If at all possible, I'd like to commit this by the end of this month. --chuck