[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZK0gcj4j/sRWx2Pl@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 02:27:14 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: "Andreas Hindborg (Samsung)" <nmi@...aspace.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:BLOCK LAYER" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Minwoo Im <minwoo.im.dev@...il.com>,
Matias Bjorling <Matias.Bjorling@....com>,
gost.dev@...sung.com, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Aravind Ramesh <Aravind.Ramesh@....com>,
Johannes Thumshirn <jth@...nel.org>,
Hans Holmberg <Hans.Holmberg@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] ublk: add opcode offsets for DRV_IN/DRV_OUT
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 11:02:15AM +0200, Andreas Hindborg (Samsung) wrote:
>
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 08:23:40AM +0200, Andreas Hindborg (Samsung) wrote:
> >> Yet most on-the-wire protocols for actual hardware does support this
> >> some way or another.
> >
> > Supports what? Passthrough? No.
>
> Both SCSI and NVMe has command identifier ranges reserved for vendor
> specific commands. I would assume that one use of these is to implement
> passthrough channels to a device for testing out new interfaces. Just
> guessing though.
Vendor specific commands is an entirely different concept from Linux
passthrough requests.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists