From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: hch@lst.de (Christoph Hellwig)
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 11:19:37 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] nvme: Add more command status translation
In-Reply-To: <2beb72a9-8502-fec8-8892-208cbb0967ac@suse.com>
References: <20180104224623.8944-1-keith.busch@intel.com>
 <20180104224623.8944-2-keith.busch@intel.com> <20180108095512.GC4673@lst.de>
 <2beb72a9-8502-fec8-8892-208cbb0967ac@suse.com>
Message-ID: <20180108101937.GA5423@lst.de>

On Mon, Jan 08, 2018@11:09:03AM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >>  	case NVME_SC_SUCCESS:
> >>  		return BLK_STS_OK;
> >>  	case NVME_SC_CAP_EXCEEDED:
> >> +	case NVME_SC_LBA_RANGE:
> >>  		return BLK_STS_NOSPC;
> > 
> > lba range isn't really enospc.  It is returned when the lba in
> > the command is outside the logical size of the namespace.
> > 
> Isn't that distinction pretty academic?
> The entire block-to-POSIX error mapping is pretty much ad-hoc anyway...

Yes, BLK_STS_NOSPC matters.  And the fix is pretty trivial, so there is
no point in arguing.