[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1389641243.5567.445.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:27:23 -0800
From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...erainc.com>,
target-devel <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagig@...lanox.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] target/configfs: Expose protection device
attributes
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:52 -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 10:30 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > Hey MKP,
> >
> > On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 16:01 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > > >>>>> "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger <nab@...erainc.com> writes:
> > >
> > > nab> This patch adds support for exposing DIF protection device
> > > nab> attributes via configfs. This includes:
> > >
> > > nab> pi_prot_type: Protection Type (0, 1, 3 currently support)
> > > nab> pi_prot_version: Protection Version (DIF v1 currently supported)
> > >
> > > What's DIF v2?
> > >
> >
> > This would be the proposed 16-byte protection scheme for SBC4.
>
> What proposed 16 byte scheme? The only DIF proposals I know for SBC-4
> are 13-185R0 and 12-369R0 and that's a couple of new algorithms and
> types because we cannot change the 8 byte PI.
>
Then I'm probably getting the SBC version wrong.. It's the one that
includes using CRC32C for the block guard, and larger space for
reference tag as mentioned by MKP.
--nab
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists