From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 20:07:01 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Anish M Jhaveri Cc: sagi@grimberg.me, hch@lst.de, keith.busch@intel.com, axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] nvme multipath support on top of nvme-4.13 branch Message-ID: <20170915180701.GA8981@lst.de> References: <20170912042048.pdbyl6vsoeui6bnp@haynes> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20170912042048.pdbyl6vsoeui6bnp@haynes> List-ID: Hi Anish, I looked over the code a bit, and I'm rather confused by the newly added commands. Which controller supports them? Also the NVMe working group went down a very different way with the ALUA approch, which uses different grouping concepts and doesn't require path activations - for Linux we'd really like to stick to only standardized multipath implementations. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hch@lst.de (Christoph Hellwig) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 20:07:01 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 00/10] nvme multipath support on top of nvme-4.13 branch In-Reply-To: <20170912042048.pdbyl6vsoeui6bnp@haynes> References: <20170912042048.pdbyl6vsoeui6bnp@haynes> Message-ID: <20170915180701.GA8981@lst.de> Hi Anish, I looked over the code a bit, and I'm rather confused by the newly added commands. Which controller supports them? Also the NVMe working group went down a very different way with the ALUA approch, which uses different grouping concepts and doesn't require path activations - for Linux we'd really like to stick to only standardized multipath implementations.