[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z-zbLx9h0IbOEmbO@ryzen>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 08:37:35 +0200
From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>
To: Kamaljit Singh <Kamaljit.Singh1@....com>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
hch <hch@....de>, "sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] nvme: add admin controller support. prohibit ioq
creation for admin & disco ctrlrs
Hello Kamaljit,
On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 10:57:36PM +0000, Kamaljit Singh wrote:
> On 2025/04/01 01:04, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>
> > But to be honest, the code did previously
> > allow an I/O controller with just the admin queue and no I/O queues.
> Agree. Initially, I was able to use that hole by forcing nvme-cli to
> allow zero IOQs. But based on your suggested driver change we don't
> need to patch nvme-cli anymore. That's slick!
>
> However, from the nvme-cli's perspective it does feel awkward to be forced
> by "nvme connect" to use -i <non-zero> for an admin-controller, even though
> its now being overridden with this patch. We will have to come up with a
> cleaner and standardized way to connect to an admin controller. A standard
> port number for an admin controller might be the way to go but it's not in
> the spec yet.
So, with this patch which overrides the user provided value,
if the controller is an admin controller, you need to use:
$ nvme connect -i <non-zero> ?
Can't you simply omit the -i parameter?
Kind regards,
Niklas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists