[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b7cfba48-91ea-46cd-b867-559d9d0d135c@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 19:28:43 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Chaitanya Kulkarni
<chaitanyak@...dia.com>, John Meneghini <jmeneghi@...hat.com>,
"emilne@...hat.com" <emilne@...hat.com>
CC: "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "jrani@...estorage.com"
<jrani@...estorage.com>, "randyj@...estorage.com" <randyj@...estorage.com>,
"hare@...nel.org" <hare@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy
"queue-depth"
>> apart from the few nits patch does looks good to me.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>
>>
>> not a blocker to merge this patch, but we need a blktests for this code
>> in nvme
>> category ...
>>
> As presented at LSF by Daniel; ALUA support (and, with that, multipath
> support) is one of the topics to be implemented for blktests.
> And without that we can't have a meaningful QD test.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hannes
we can wait for ALUA, as I said it is not a blocker but thanks pointing
that out ...
-ck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists