From owner-freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Tue Apr 4 20:50:06 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0244D2F3D9 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 20:50:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x236.google.com (mail-io0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DA6DC95 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 20:50:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x236.google.com with SMTP id z13so103978262iof.2 for ; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 13:50:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=ZU15d2gwpvDjRMvFQtKWiuHZBoAQxw7i4837mcsKkSc=; b=vQxrNzLFPAKg+TAS+g3m17L3YEYrD9CsI65uLGkRoyLt3TiZEmjB6dRekbX+81NQTZ AHakk9a84PPDqIIlGoi6k18YEdlRHcZCI7WEVCOkRTXE/QCubD9Xtkkn8IVin2Gwt9SL t1ThRKhAV3YqpUV2+kmRkelmbakn1h81NZPY7rwYauNhENEq/UgmOnXniThrlEZ+EeCa zIAABKcMODMriEyoFbm6NjGXGq6rUjONaDW7IwLm634Py/dXfb7eeyrVFuIoEJKKzfEG CBHzFygDbVAav5Ku1bUnEVKqaAdJSUDwt20aYUWv++tJViTjnTvsCIpF3oI7/COPX1bV Lrfg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZU15d2gwpvDjRMvFQtKWiuHZBoAQxw7i4837mcsKkSc=; b=GkhAJx9aQ9v3zs6XsRCrC+DM8NtEckf6lRn9+bdlN7SRM2Pga2NES2gAhzUM9isd6e lYeDUc+KMHwDHBrsJQeGvgFz/88EgMJ8FBRRi4eRaXibGeg0mp1rZ/a9yXFqDrPcMPhO 8RibRIPVWTT7vGjTM4yCVgfPa/75g0OTtLEG2NNG7IGTHu8JM26xB/BgdEdFIcXM8jfi eOKxuPRr2p1egf++GvybhrMkqD5e5K4UuUhwi2m20pvO+qs3Ym573H6U38rRreO6/a9L FQWg9V7aIetTz87dlIingjaagaGZAfrG+k6jC5EDRXjHgNBynIZRaznpvufcj2QP8WcN 1+JA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0MY0xwEjQxBkxzhOWM6PBqdOMl/CYmRh1PjTew8JhMwP790EFdL4szoUu4zLV1jIX2o7iIGayfJ3BEXg== X-Received: by 10.107.174.220 with SMTP id n89mr25949159ioo.166.1491339005679; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 13:50:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.146.24 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 13:50:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2607:fb10:7021:1::9a56] In-Reply-To: References: From: Warner Losh Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 14:50:05 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Sx_3GTXekijQ7QuTG2sVQOdOJls Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] CAM pass(4) patch for NVMe To: Chuck Tuffli Cc: freebsd-scsi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2017 20:50:06 -0000 On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Chuck Tuffli wrote: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Warner Losh 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 .... ? Seems reasonable to me. Warner