From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Mon Nov 21 19:50:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@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 F39B0C4DEB5 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 19:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-it0-x22b.google.com (mail-it0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22b]) (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 BCA1E183F for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 19:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-it0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id j191so426527ita.1 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 11:50:36 -0800 (PST) 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=MzVYMt/CTYEisqV4FB3W+JZAO/qtlqRwsj5KgAv+6jk=; b=IAOlAPPdKNwndAWjTqQr6bkODW+nXt9L5YG5WdUgCUPFxa5M7BBFCCKu4AsrFUSR0R W0QJWf+xZMQM0niIQRtYHWXJXvrz71kJZNckvXXwrC/dzBvGtz5I87krwVw+dXxYQmtF D7T72kggDedAwhXRLsKSUpqTGsaRe6RB/N8f+OIdIUznxb/RZ7ZfQs8phxkKmj3yJHRf xXshfPfsK4sNbWITQ009py2bw7TfFOX09Uehl0g0VxePaJWReqTSC5NmN0gLqhPrja1H DQ0jjG35JrYHNjRIW5F1Hr1RxTq1eQcJoBQtI4jwQJGRhe2qk30wEdQetqxysOuJhOaZ 454w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MzVYMt/CTYEisqV4FB3W+JZAO/qtlqRwsj5KgAv+6jk=; b=OdANMojTpqRO3TpVu1W9VPUhyYDpuhmiqk/CrFRLW/nQse8np9AzPjzJF1DEFXoZSW bl8EFAxfmswYwHDqMPQ0UloYNpnV2/1AYmGUyF14tr4389N/tAWd6FGK+ep7dYbcXG3C 4mClJhxjUARR70PD75txewIQZJsOx9IGKKwnBX/8QZ87YZieY3dDkGdCE6MmoqnC1qMV Gwprehyymjcgey3M34fdWf0iaiIUW6lLDcJ25NNCudf1NRSwo5I2sANLjGA4sTGEFFXA gwOMprlDJyfN1NTahaeTZ68yLdGh5tUENVx5Ud/Vrt22R4qzUA02OM1zIY++4HKzKF/8 9NMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02zUe8u7hvG1GXTMq7zquN5mkEip7Kq3EemdJT6X/Nn4Xkne773WGQPQb+Vi8Tw3FFqqDHvIfFtIpJf1Q== X-Received: by 10.36.5.208 with SMTP id 199mr10806521itl.103.1479757836189; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 11:50:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.134.66 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 11:50:35 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [69.53.245.200] In-Reply-To: <123365400.XYmKG93e4H@ralph.baldwin.cx> References: <201611192146.uAJLkDP5094317@repo.freebsd.org> <123365400.XYmKG93e4H@ralph.baldwin.cx> From: Warner Losh Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 12:50:35 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0wTj0FXnCHw2JDsOjh3rsbFNyv0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r308869 - head/sbin/nvmecontrol To: John Baldwin Cc: Warner Losh , src-committers , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 19:50:37 -0000 On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:07 AM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday, November 19, 2016 09:46:13 PM Warner Losh wrote: >> Author: imp >> Date: Sat Nov 19 21:46:13 2016 >> New Revision: 308869 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/308869 >> >> Log: >> i386 turns out to not have __uint128_t. So confusingly use 64-bit math >> instead. Since we're little endian, we can get away with it. Also, >> since the counters in quesitons would require billions of iops for >> tens of billions of seconds to overflow, and since such data rates are >> unlikely for people using i386 for a while, that's OK. The fastest >> cards today can't do even a million IOPs. >> >> Noticed by: dim@ >> Sponsored by: Netflix, Inc > > It probably has it if you compile with -march= where is new > enough to have SSE. Yea, but this solution was good enough... There's also a lot of issues with 128bit ints in different versions of gcc and I didn't want to play the whack-a-mole game, so I punted. > Is nvme inherently x86-only? No. However, the implementation was done by Intel, only tested on x86 and has known issues with endian-ness. So we build only on x86. Warner