* NVMe driver status @ 2015-01-19 12:00 Sunad Bhandary 2015-01-19 14:33 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-01-19 12:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Keith, Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one with the multi-queue implementation which is under active development and the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe git page. Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or will it be done away with completely ? Regards, Sunad ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-01-19 12:00 NVMe driver status Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-01-19 14:33 ` Keith Busch 2015-01-20 12:02 ` Sunad Bhandary 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-01-19 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Sunad, The mainline going forward with kernel 3.19 will be blk-mq, and the linux-nvme tree will be there as well on the next upstream merge. I have my own repo for maintaining the bio-based version since a lot of OS vendors are using older kernels in their minor release cycles. I can push this out to a public repo on git.infradead.org if there's interest. Thanks, Keith On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one with the > multi-queue implementation which is under active development and > the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe git page. > > Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or will it > be done away with completely ? > > Regards, > Sunad ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-01-19 14:33 ` Keith Busch @ 2015-01-20 12:02 ` Sunad Bhandary 2015-01-20 15:46 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-01-20 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Keith, Thanks for clarifying the situation. If suppose the bio-based driver version is pushed out to a public repo, will it be made just a source repo or will it be actively maintained where new patches are acceptable and can be merged into the repo ? Thanks and regards, Sunad -----Original Message----- From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Keith Busch Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 8:03 PM To: Sunad Bhandary Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: NVMe driver status Hi Sunad, The mainline going forward with kernel 3.19 will be blk-mq, and the linux-nvme tree will be there as well on the next upstream merge. I have my own repo for maintaining the bio-based version since a lot of OS vendors are using older kernels in their minor release cycles. I can push this out to a public repo on git.infradead.org if there's interest. Thanks, Keith On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one > with the multi-queue implementation which is under active development > and the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe git page. > > Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or > will it be done away with completely ? > > Regards, > Sunad _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-01-20 12:02 ` Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-01-20 15:46 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-10 15:20 ` Sunad Bhandary 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-01-20 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw) Okay, I added the repo to here: http://git.infradead.org/users/kbusch/nvme-legacy.git It's based off linux-stable v3.18.3, plus a merge from linux-nvme for nvme parts that were not committed upstream by 3.18. I don't know what kind of activity to expect this will get, but I'll be happy to merge applicable upstream commits and apply patches for any new features or bug fixes people want to see in the bio-based nvme driver. On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Thanks for clarifying the situation. > > If suppose the bio-based driver version is pushed out to a public repo, will > it be made just a source repo or > will it be actively maintained where new patches are acceptable and can be > merged into the repo ? > > Thanks and regards, > Sunad > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf > Of Keith Busch > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 8:03 PM > To: Sunad Bhandary > Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: NVMe driver status > > Hi Sunad, > > The mainline going forward with kernel 3.19 will be blk-mq, and the > linux-nvme tree will be there as well on the next upstream merge. > > I have my own repo for maintaining the bio-based version since a lot of OS > vendors are using older kernels in their minor release cycles. I can push > this out to a public repo on git.infradead.org if there's interest. > > Thanks, > Keith > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: >> Hi Keith, >> >> Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one >> with the multi-queue implementation which is under active development >> and the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe git > page. >> >> Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or >> will it be done away with completely ? >> >> Regards, >> Sunad > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-nvme mailing list > Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-01-20 15:46 ` Keith Busch @ 2015-03-10 15:20 ` Sunad Bhandary 2015-03-10 19:11 ` David Darrington 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-03-10 15:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Keith, Can we initiate some activity on the legacy-nvme maintenance? Can you commit the async controller probe patch for the legacy driver also? Or I can do this if you want. Also, I'll be submitting the legacy-nvme version for a couple of patches that we already submitted (write_long, split i/o in IOCtl path). Going forward, how will the legacy-nvme be maintained? The legacy-nvme was removed in 3.19. So are we going to have some restrictions on the kernel versions supported by legacy nvme driver Regards, Sunad -----Original Message----- From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Keith Busch Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:17 PM To: Sunad Bhandary Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status Okay, I added the repo to here: http://git.infradead.org/users/kbusch/nvme-legacy.git It's based off linux-stable v3.18.3, plus a merge from linux-nvme for nvme parts that were not committed upstream by 3.18. I don't know what kind of activity to expect this will get, but I'll be happy to merge applicable upstream commits and apply patches for any new features or bug fixes people want to see in the bio-based nvme driver. On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Thanks for clarifying the situation. > > If suppose the bio-based driver version is pushed out to a public > repo, will it be made just a source repo or will it be actively > maintained where new patches are acceptable and can be merged into the > repo ? > > Thanks and regards, > Sunad > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On > Behalf Of Keith Busch > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 8:03 PM > To: Sunad Bhandary > Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: NVMe driver status > > Hi Sunad, > > The mainline going forward with kernel 3.19 will be blk-mq, and the > linux-nvme tree will be there as well on the next upstream merge. > > I have my own repo for maintaining the bio-based version since a lot > of OS vendors are using older kernels in their minor release cycles. I > can push this out to a public repo on git.infradead.org if there's interest. > > Thanks, > Keith > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: >> Hi Keith, >> >> Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one >> with the multi-queue implementation which is under active development >> and the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe >> git > page. >> >> Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or >> will it be done away with completely ? >> >> Regards, >> Sunad > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-nvme mailing list > Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-10 15:20 ` Sunad Bhandary @ 2015-03-10 19:11 ` David Darrington 2015-03-10 20:01 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: David Darrington @ 2015-03-10 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw) I'm interested in this also. I know that the there is a quarterly planning call for the ofed Windows NVMe driver. Would there be any interest in having occasional conference calls to discuss items such as these? I would be glad to setup a call, as long as Keith and/or Mathew agree that it is worthwhile and can attend. -----Original Message----- From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Sunad Bhandary Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:21 AM To: 'Keith Busch' Cc: linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status Hi Keith, Can we initiate some activity on the legacy-nvme maintenance? Can you commit the async controller probe patch for the legacy driver also? Or I can do this if you want. Also, I'll be submitting the legacy-nvme version for a couple of patches that we already submitted (write_long, split i/o in IOCtl path). Going forward, how will the legacy-nvme be maintained? The legacy-nvme was removed in 3.19. So are we going to have some restrictions on the kernel versions supported by legacy nvme driver Regards, Sunad -----Original Message----- From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Keith Busch Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:17 PM To: Sunad Bhandary Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status Okay, I added the repo to here: http://git.infradead.org/users/kbusch/nvme-legacy.git It's based off linux-stable v3.18.3, plus a merge from linux-nvme for nvme parts that were not committed upstream by 3.18. I don't know what kind of activity to expect this will get, but I'll be happy to merge applicable upstream commits and apply patches for any new features or bug fixes people want to see in the bio-based nvme driver. On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Thanks for clarifying the situation. > > If suppose the bio-based driver version is pushed out to a public > repo, will it be made just a source repo or will it be actively > maintained where new patches are acceptable and can be merged into the > repo ? > > Thanks and regards, > Sunad > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On > Behalf Of Keith Busch > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 8:03 PM > To: Sunad Bhandary > Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: NVMe driver status > > Hi Sunad, > > The mainline going forward with kernel 3.19 will be blk-mq, and the > linux-nvme tree will be there as well on the next upstream merge. > > I have my own repo for maintaining the bio-based version since a lot > of OS vendors are using older kernels in their minor release cycles. I > can push this out to a public repo on git.infradead.org if there's interest. > > Thanks, > Keith > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Sunad Bhandary wrote: >> Hi Keith, >> >> Currently there are two different variants of the NVMe driver, one >> with the multi-queue implementation which is under active development >> and the one without it which is the current driver hosted in the NVMe >> git > page. >> >> Going forward will the non-multi queue driver also be maintained or >> will it be done away with completely ? >> >> Regards, >> Sunad > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-nvme mailing list > Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-10 19:11 ` David Darrington @ 2015-03-10 20:01 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-11 18:06 ` Brandon Schulz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-03-10 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) I'm happy to apply requested changes. I can't necessarily guarantee a particular deadline, though I try to align with interested OS vendors ahead of their release updates if they're using the older version. Specifically on async probe and others, I'll get these merged in later this week. On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, David Darrington wrote: > I'm interested in this also. I know that the there is a quarterly planning call for the ofed Windows NVMe driver. Would there be any interest in having occasional conference calls to discuss items such as these? I would be glad to setup a call, as long as Keith and/or Mathew agree that it is worthwhile and can attend. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Sunad Bhandary > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:21 AM > To: 'Keith Busch' > Cc: linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > Subject: RE: NVMe driver status > > Hi Keith, > Can we initiate some activity on the legacy-nvme maintenance? > > Can you commit the async controller probe patch for the legacy driver also? > Or I can do this if you want. > Also, I'll be submitting the legacy-nvme version for a couple of patches that we already submitted (write_long, split i/o in IOCtl path). > > Going forward, how will the legacy-nvme be maintained? > The legacy-nvme was removed in 3.19. So are we going to have some restrictions on the kernel versions supported by legacy nvme driver ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-10 20:01 ` Keith Busch @ 2015-03-11 18:06 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-11 18:40 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-11 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw) Is there any kind of coordination among contributors on backports to legacy-nvme or is it just kind of a free-for-all until someone submits a patch on this list? Thanks, Brandon Brandon Schulz Systems & Software Architect SSD Device Development HGST, a Western Digital company brandon.schulz at hgst.com o: (507) 322-2257 3605 Hwy 52 N Rochester, MN 55901 www.hgst.com -----Original Message----- From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces@lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Keith Busch Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 3:02 PM To: David Darrington Cc: 'Keith Busch'; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org; Sunad Bhandary Subject: RE: NVMe driver status I'm happy to apply requested changes. I can't necessarily guarantee a particular deadline, though I try to align with interested OS vendors ahead of their release updates if they're using the older version. Specifically on async probe and others, I'll get these merged in later this week. On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, David Darrington wrote: > I'm interested in this also. I know that the there is a quarterly planning call for the ofed Windows NVMe driver. Would there be any interest in having occasional conference calls to discuss items such as these? I would be glad to setup a call, as long as Keith and/or Mathew agree that it is worthwhile and can attend. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux-nvme [mailto:linux-nvme-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On > Behalf Of Sunad Bhandary > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:21 AM > To: 'Keith Busch' > Cc: linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org > Subject: RE: NVMe driver status > > Hi Keith, > Can we initiate some activity on the legacy-nvme maintenance? > > Can you commit the async controller probe patch for the legacy driver also? > Or I can do this if you want. > Also, I'll be submitting the legacy-nvme version for a couple of patches that we already submitted (write_long, split i/o in IOCtl path). > > Going forward, how will the legacy-nvme be maintained? > The legacy-nvme was removed in 3.19. So are we going to have some > restrictions on the kernel versions supported by legacy nvme driver _______________________________________________ Linux-nvme mailing list Linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-11 18:06 ` Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-11 18:40 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-11 21:17 ` Brandon Schulz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-03-11 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Is there any kind of coordination among contributors on backports to > legacy-nvme or is it just kind of a free-for-all until someone submits a > patch on this list? Coordination is done on the mailing lists, though that probably feels a bit like a free-for-all. I originally started the 3.18 fork so I can point distro vendors using older kernels to a public tree to pull commits ahead of their updates. It sounds like there is considerable outside interest, so if people are open to co-maintaining, we can fork this to a github or something like that. > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-11 18:40 ` Keith Busch @ 2015-03-11 21:17 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-12 2:01 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-11 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Yes, we are interested in co-maintaining... something like Github would work for us. Do you want to set something up, or how do you want to proceed? Thanks, Brandon -----Original Message----- From: Keith Busch [mailto:keith.busch@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 1:40 PM To: Brandon Schulz Cc: Keith Busch; David Darrington; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Is there any kind of coordination among contributors on backports to > legacy-nvme or is it just kind of a free-for-all until someone submits > a patch on this list? Coordination is done on the mailing lists, though that probably feels a bit like a free-for-all. I originally started the 3.18 fork so I can point distro vendors using older kernels to a public tree to pull commits ahead of their updates. It sounds like there is considerable outside interest, so if people are open to co-maintaining, we can fork this to a github or something like that. > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-11 21:17 ` Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-12 2:01 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-12 16:32 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-16 14:52 ` Brandon Schulz 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-03-12 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Yes, we are interested in co-maintaining... something like Github would work for us. > > Do you want to set something up, or how do you want to proceed? Are any of you folks at Linux Vault this week? We can put together an impromptu BoF and sort this out real quick. > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-12 2:01 ` Keith Busch @ 2015-03-12 16:32 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-16 14:52 ` Brandon Schulz 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-12 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Sorry Keith - Dave and I are not at Linux Vault... Brandon -----Original Message----- From: Keith Busch [mailto:keith.busch@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 9:02 PM To: Brandon Schulz Cc: Keith Busch; David Darrington; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Yes, we are interested in co-maintaining... something like Github would work for us. > > Do you want to set something up, or how do you want to proceed? Are any of you folks at Linux Vault this week? We can put together an impromptu BoF and sort this out real quick. > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-12 2:01 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-12 16:32 ` Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-16 14:52 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-16 17:19 ` Keith Busch 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-16 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw) Keith - Any more thoughts on how we proceed with setting up this co-maintained Github space? Thanks, Brandon -----Original Message----- From: Keith Busch [mailto:keith.busch@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 9:02 PM To: Brandon Schulz Cc: Keith Busch; David Darrington; linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org Subject: RE: NVMe driver status On Wed, 11 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Yes, we are interested in co-maintaining... something like Github would work for us. > > Do you want to set something up, or how do you want to proceed? Are any of you folks at Linux Vault this week? We can put together an impromptu BoF and sort this out real quick. > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* NVMe driver status 2015-03-16 14:52 ` Brandon Schulz @ 2015-03-16 17:19 ` Keith Busch 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Keith Busch @ 2015-03-16 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) If you setup a github project, I'll subscribe to it. I merged all the upstream patches I intended to apply today and pushed to 'for-next' branch in the nvme-legacy git tree. I haven't fully tested yet, otherwise I'd have just merged to master. Also merged the lastest stable 3.18.y to master. On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Brandon Schulz wrote: > Keith - > > Any more thoughts on how we proceed with setting up this co-maintained Github space? > > Thanks, > Brandon ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-03-16 17:19 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-01-19 12:00 NVMe driver status Sunad Bhandary 2015-01-19 14:33 ` Keith Busch 2015-01-20 12:02 ` Sunad Bhandary 2015-01-20 15:46 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-10 15:20 ` Sunad Bhandary 2015-03-10 19:11 ` David Darrington 2015-03-10 20:01 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-11 18:06 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-11 18:40 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-11 21:17 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-12 2:01 ` Keith Busch 2015-03-12 16:32 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-16 14:52 ` Brandon Schulz 2015-03-16 17:19 ` Keith Busch
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox