[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d2bd7b74-aa81-f00e-282b-ff51deecbe39@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 11:45:25 +0200
From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
Linux NVMe Mailinglist <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] nvmet: add eui64 field to nvme_ns and populate via
configfs
On 05/30/2017 11:25 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 10:08:18AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> Add the EUI-64 field from the NVMe Namespace Identification Descriptor
>> to the nvmet_ns structure and allow it's population via configfs.
>
> Is there any good use case for bothering with this identifier that's
> too short to actually be useful?
Mostly consistency. The current nvme host code has the EUI sprinkled all
around. Sure I can drop it, but then what's the point in evaluating it
on the host side? Other targets may send it, so we need in on the host
and do we care about potentially awkward host implementations with Linux
as a target? Also it's rather handy for testing as well, after all it's
not too much and complex code.
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@...e.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
Powered by blists - more mailing lists