From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Mon Nov 21 20:29:05 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@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 82E1EC4D9E5 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:29:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x230.google.com (mail-io0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::230]) (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 434C5F5A for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:29:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x230.google.com with SMTP id j65so50309663iof.0 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 12:29:05 -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=s39OwUJhkv3sooLdKzVNtztlRcjZgnstfV6P0hlAzlo=; b=VrBN1bTHNEii0oSZMbbzIznGYcN0ANwB8SI9auFzeKMXJgryqxnuLt4mcmn9sIjKFH w87dvZHPniNDFmkLhpHyo7qmHD/e6zZd2FfxYWwgXOQYeCjSxCrETgCd2MOQqA/KpaO6 MpJKF4AfYwx7dUZxrn75cZKEVw56f+JXEAAVLAVGiAHaIlkAGY2bnuBJuKPYOyNA+3WQ QSoRA/R/v//ToWN/DzPdiReG/fESMhVbZu28wptP7JBHrnIUKzcvUEvW1RqB4uFLaY0S EsDphkUDRBjPDoBoy5FqTZDcsH1xeZRZRIFVmTBhTH8Mk/ZHP01AyyF8x2/QSIbSrixf yncQ== 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=s39OwUJhkv3sooLdKzVNtztlRcjZgnstfV6P0hlAzlo=; b=kEiXWFFWcIkUxOq3S3MJKZAih6jEuXVTUGeK45MvaOmgbJp9J+sP8ilibycWVeqSzb 1EJSP4cd7bWZZGgIFEezD4cNfl1CwNkBttdQUOFVTa8mJPREHoNwD7x8d3e/fyDUkewj LqNxmH+5Di++Ql9E1CiD0w6DWcwBQLNYCRAGsFC+9NsfRqQ7Db0i+JqeBBAEe7zpzkaf 2CDCW2BihqJwjLwdpkDrjKIKGYgGcteIC9VXcdNIU/k+Je5KSQPzm0PWWbE6MAjvAqmW ZIqaEYHAHuMEOVnPYk74YqyzjpQWb7fNxpk36p+aGimOumA13erqYeU6vQ5qE0iWK4x1 GNVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00OUPuI6ZTIAQjK8oCH5opO4sJeFnReadFVNuVmPnixTRBZZW5YXtr4ZjDf9FbgameHIZlDaxR1fNTrzg== X-Received: by 10.107.139.74 with SMTP id n71mr14746550iod.166.1479760144582; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 12:29:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.134.66 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2016 12:29:04 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: <2066039.9u44RCLHQT@ralph.baldwin.cx> References: <201611192146.uAJLkDP5094317@repo.freebsd.org> <123365400.XYmKG93e4H@ralph.baldwin.cx> <2066039.9u44RCLHQT@ralph.baldwin.cx> From: Warner Losh Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 13:29:04 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Scq4mA8NXoaQ7oZ6-kWPcLywjHM 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-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 20:29:05 -0000 On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 1:16 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday, November 21, 2016 12:50:35 PM Warner Losh wrote: >> 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. > > Yes. We don't require SSE for i386, so we're stuck handling the non-SSE > case currently. Yea, this is fine. >> > 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. > > Something of a shame as you can probably shove one of these boards in > arm64 servers. No doubt. arm64 wouldn't be super hard, assuming that all the BUSDMA stuff got done correctly and there's no weird alignment issues with the crazy structures that nvme defines... Warner