[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171103125339.GA25186@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 13:53:40 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Javier González <jg@...htnvm.io>
Cc: hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me, keith.busch@...el.com,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Javier González <javier@...xlabs.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] nvme: do not check for ns on rw path
> - if (ns && ns->ms &&
> + if (ns->ms &&
> (!ns->pi_type || ns->ms != sizeof(struct t10_pi_tuple)) &&
> !blk_integrity_rq(req) && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(req))
> return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;
blk_rq_is_passthrough also can't be true here.
How about:
if (ns->ms && !blk_integrity_rq(req) &&
(!ns->pi_type || ns->ms != sizeof(struct t10_pi_tuple)))
return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;
Although I have to admit I don't really understand what this check
is even trying to do. It basically checks for a namespace that has
a format with metadata that is not T10 protection information and
then rejects all I/O to it. Why are we even creating a block device
node for such a thing?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists