Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 13:48:00 -0700 From: Chuck Tuffli <chuck@tuffli.net> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-scsi <freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] CAM pass(4) patch for NVMe Message-ID: <CAM0tzX0paPg9Bg3KJCLLy9kO7v8UzKs%2BigHaOy68Hkgvv9OuOw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfqtH8AQ=JW8OMYk5VGHTJk6Brchm6OUv9_=ROaD7ZbqfA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAM0tzX2b1NU=y1Vr=XeU63D5=3FJVHPD9e9fLSFaNvQhLtQa=A@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfoTroqgvtwW8fJyquf063cJfdriUfyOqNOy=rx8wM=Qsg@mail.gmail.com> <CAM0tzX0r3VrypNqW0D%2BQRJPO62ogKo1_o3eNg%2BKAYa=yBRMEKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfqtH8AQ=JW8OMYk5VGHTJk6Brchm6OUv9_=ROaD7ZbqfA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: ... > Fair Enough. I'd thought 0xffff was the magic number :). However, you > raise a good point. > > Grep tells me all the xflags are actually unused. So we could use it, > but after chatting with Scott Long, I'm not sure that we should. > > However, I think Jim's idea of having a separate command for commands > for the I/O queue and commands for the admin queue might be the better > part of valor here. I'd initially read Jim's mail as use #defines for > the xflags values, but that's not at all what he was saying. > > The code change would be a bit bigger, but not by a lot. It's super > easy to add new XPT_ function code. OK, I'll head down that path and add a new XPT opcode XPT_NVME_ADMIN and helper macro cam_fill_nvmeadmin() which would be used for Admin commands. The existing XPT_NVME_IO would be used for NVM/IO commands. Both opcodes would use the ccb_nvmeio structure unless there are objections .... ? --chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAM0tzX0paPg9Bg3KJCLLy9kO7v8UzKs%2BigHaOy68Hkgvv9OuOw>