From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@samsung.com>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] nvmet: allow async passthrough of commands that change logical block contents
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 08:59:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221214075937.GB4250@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e80c7fdc-09b3-111f-d479-54ab49008679@nvidia.com>
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 04:52:47AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> > - effects = nvme_command_effects(ctrl, ns, req->cmd->common.opcode);
> > - if (req->p.use_workqueue || effects) {
> > + if (nvme_command_effects(ctrl, ns, req->cmd->common.opcode) &
> > + ~NVME_CMD_EFFECTS_LBCC)
> > + req->p.use_workqueue = true;
> > +
>
> How about this instead of calling function in if which is much cleaner
> unless it has a bug ?
>
> effect = nvme_command_effects(ctrl, ns, req->cmd->common.opcode);
>
> req->p.use_workqueue = effetcs & ~NVME_CMD_EFFECTS_LBCC;
This would clear the bit if it is already set. The being said
I'm not a fan of how the use_workqueue flag is set, and I now have
an idea on how to remove it entirely.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-14 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-13 16:24 only allow unprivileged passthrough for commands without effects Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 1/7] nvmet: use NVME_CMD_EFFECTS_CSUPP instead of open coding it Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-14 4:46 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 2/7] nvmet: set the LBCC bit for commands that modify data Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-14 4:47 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 3/7] nvmet: allow async passthrough of commands that change logical block contents Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-14 4:52 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-12-14 7:59 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 4/7] nvme: remove nvme_execute_passthru_rq Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-14 4:54 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 5/7] nvme: only return actual effects from nvme_command_effects Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 6/7] nvme: also return I/O command " Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-13 17:53 ` Keith Busch
2022-12-13 18:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-13 19:18 ` Keith Busch
2022-12-14 7:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-12-13 16:24 ` [PATCH 7/7] nvme: don't allow unprivileged passthrough of commands that have effects Christoph Hellwig
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 \
--in-reply-to=20221214075937.GB4250@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=joshi.k@samsung.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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