From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DC4C433E0 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:01:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA64864E90 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:01:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232288AbhCQRAd (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:00:33 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:38058 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232000AbhCQRAC (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:00:02 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 6215468BEB; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:59:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:59:59 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jens Axboe Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Kanchan Joshi , kbusch@kernel.org, chaitanya.kulkarni@wdc.com, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, anuj20.g@samsung.com, javier.gonz@samsung.com, nj.shetty@samsung.com, selvakuma.s1@samsung.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] nvme: wire up support for async passthrough Message-ID: <20210317165959.GA25097@lst.de> References: <20210316140126.24900-1-joshi.k@samsung.com> <20210316140126.24900-4-joshi.k@samsung.com> <20210317085258.GA19580@lst.de> <149d2bc7-ec80-2e51-7db1-15765f35a27f@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <149d2bc7-ec80-2e51-7db1-15765f35a27f@kernel.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:49:28AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > I will post it soon, only reason I haven't reposted is that I'm not that > happy with how the sqe split is done (and that it's done in the first > place). But I'll probably just post the current version for comments, > and hopefully we can get it to where it needs to be soon. Yes, I don't like that at all either. I almost wonder if we should use an entirely different format after opcode and flags, although I suspect fd would be nice to have in the same spot as well. On a related note: I think it really should have a generic cmd dispatching mechanism like ioctls have, preferably even enforcing the _IO* mechanism.