From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:05:11 -0700 Subject: Question about ioctl interface - IO passthru In-Reply-To: References: <20190131145539.GB19637@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20190131190510.GA20974@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019@06:39:28PM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > So I think it is a good start that to use the nvme_passthru command and make it more generic. > > Keith any comments on this ? > > or should we extend the nvme_user_io command with > the new addition such as result field (less likely in my?opinion, may break IOCTL)?? Yeah, we can't break the ioctl ABI. :( The only reason I haven't moved nvme-cli from user_io to passthru is that user_io works on every nvme capable kernel, and it also supported metadata long before passthru did. I think it's overdue, though, I'll just add a new param for ancient-kernel compatibility mode to fallback to the legacy user_io.