From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
Cc: Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <[email protected]>,
Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] nvme: wire up support for async passthrough
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 14:17:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 11:41:33AM +0900, Keith Busch wrote:
> I'll need to think on this to consider if the memory cost is worth it
> (8b to 64b), but you could replace nvme_request's 'struct nvme_command'
> pointer with the struct itself and not have to allocate anything per IO.
> An added bonus is that sync and async handling become more the same.
This would solve a lot of mess with the async passthrough, and also
more closely match what is done in SCSI. In theory we could use a
cut down version without the data and metadata pointers (just 40 bytes),
but I'm not sure that is really worth it given that we then need to
rearrange things in the I/O path.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-05 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20210302160907epcas5p4d04ab7c4ef4d467302498f06ed656b24@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2021-03-02 16:07 ` [RFC 0/3] Async nvme passthrough Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20210302161000epcas5p3ec5c461a8eec593b6d83a9127c7fec4f@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2021-03-02 16:07 ` [RFC 1/3] io_uring: add helper for uring_cmd completion in submitter-task Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20210302161005epcas5p23f28fe21bab5a3e07b9b382dd2406fdc@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2021-03-02 16:07 ` [RFC 2/3] nvme: passthrough helper with callback Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-03 7:52 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-03-04 11:13 ` Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-05 4:14 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-03-05 10:40 ` Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20210302161010epcas5p4da13d3f866ff4ed45c04fb82929d1c83@epcas5p4.samsung.com>
2021-03-02 16:07 ` [RFC 3/3] nvme: wire up support for async passthrough Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-03 7:34 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-03-04 11:01 ` Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-04 22:59 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-03-05 1:46 ` Jens Axboe
2021-03-05 2:41 ` Keith Busch
2021-03-05 10:44 ` Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-05 13:17 ` hch [this message]
2021-03-03 7:35 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-03-04 10:55 ` Kanchan Joshi
2021-03-05 13:22 ` hch
2021-03-03 7:37 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox