From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] nvme: update nvme_id_ns OPTPERF constants
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 17:20:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260220162007.GA15462@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADUfDZrx0pvf4HLk73vMmJNLQ8cE8S0FLLTj-hUE7a4f=uE-RQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 08:17:29AM -0800, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 8:07 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 08:28:05PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote:
> > > Since NVM Command Spec 1.1, OPTPERF comprises both bits 4 and 5 of
> > > NSFEAT in the Identify Namespace structure. Replace NVME_NS_FEAT_IO_OPT,
> > > which represented only bit 4, with NVME_NS_FEAT_OPTPERF_SHIFT and
> > > NVME_NS_FEAT_OPTPERF_MASK.
> >
> > As you're deeper in this than me: do the older specs require the
> > other bit to be cleared to zero and this is all compatible? Or do
> > we need to guard it somehow?
>
> In NVM Command Set spec 1.0 (NVMe version 2.0), OPTPERF is only bit 4
> of NSFEAT and the higher bits are reserved. I think it seems
> relatively safe to assume bit 5 will be reported as 0 on controllers
> advertising older NVMe versions, but you're correct that the host
> should technically check for version >= 2.1 before using bit 5. Let me
> know which approach you'd prefer.
Not entirely sure, but either way the code should have a big fat
comment about this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-20 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-20 3:28 [PATCH 0/6] nvme: improve discard_granularity spec compliance Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 1/6] nvme: add preferred I/O size fields to struct nvme_id_ns_nvm Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-21 2:55 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-23 13:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 2/6] nvme: update nvme_id_ns OPTPERF constants Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 16:17 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:20 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 3/6] nvme: always issue I/O Command Set specific Identify Namespace Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 4/6] nvme: set discard_granularity from NPDG/NPDA Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 5/6] nvmet: use NVME_NS_FEAT_OPTPERF_SHIFT Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH 6/6] nvmet: report NPDGL and NPDAL Caleb Sander Mateos
2026-02-20 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-20 16:05 ` [PATCH 0/6] nvme: improve discard_granularity spec compliance 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=20260220162007.GA15462@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=kch@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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