From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: hch's native NVMe multipathing [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Don't blacklist nvme] Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:37:41 +0000 Message-ID: <1487266648.2612.3.camel@sandisk.com> References: <1487107154-24883-1-git-send-email-keith.busch@intel.com> <20170215145617.GA4241@infradead.org> <20170216025357.GA9241@redhat.com> <20170216142621.GA21972@infradead.org> <20170216151337.GA12678@redhat.com> <20170216173856.GB17828@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Received: from esa1.hgst.iphmx.com ([68.232.141.245]:56456 "EHLO esa1.hgst.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754810AbdBPRlP (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:41:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20170216173856.GB17828@localhost.localdomain> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "keith.busch@intel.com" , "snitzer@redhat.com" Cc: "dm-devel@redhat.com" , "hch@infradead.org" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" On Thu, 2017-02-16 at 12:38 -0500, Keith Busch wrote: > Maybe I'm not seeing the bigger picture. Is there some part to multipath > that the kernel is not in a better position to handle? Does this mean that the code to parse /etc/multipath.conf will be moved into the kernel? Or will we lose the ability to configure the policies that /etc/multipath.conf allows to configure? Bart.