From: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
John Meneghini <jmeneghi@redhat.com>,
bmarzins@redhat.com, Bryan Gurney <bgurney@redhat.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Marco Patalano <mpatalan@redhat.com>,
axboe@kernel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: remove multipath module parameter
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 20:49:09 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2c9df64-0afc-46cd-9e8d-6a3f41a4f1c7@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z8pB9jQALxMN6WaA@kbusch-mbp>
On 3/7/25 6:16 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 04:16:54PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:01:19AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
>>
>>> Or consider a true multiport PCIe where each port connects to a
>>> different host. Each host sees a single port so they're not using
>>> multipath capabilities, and the admin wants the MD behavior that removes
>>> a disk on hot plug. Or even if one host sees both paths of a multiport
>>> PCIe, they still might want that hot plug behavior. The module parameter
>>> makes that possible, so some equivalent should be available before
>>> removing it.
>>
>> A module-wide parameter is absolutely the wrong way to configure it.
>> You'd ad best want it per-controller or even per-namespace. One
>> tradeoff would be to disable the multipath code for private namespaces,
>> although that would cause problems when rescanning changes the flag.
>
> It's not really about private vs. shared namespaces, though. There
> really is no programatic way for the driver to know what behavior the
> admin needs out of their system without user input. If you don't want a
> module parameter, then the driver will just have to default to
> something, then the user will have to do something to change it later.
> Not very pleasant compared to a simple one time boot parameter.
>
I think always creating multipath head node even for the disk which doesn't
have CMIC/NMIC capability should be useful. That way, we may then be able
to remove multipath module parameter? In fact, you already mentioned about
it in one of your previous message. I see two approaches (one of them you
proposed and another one Christoph proposed:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/Y+1aKcQgbskA2tra@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com/).
Maybe in first cut we should create multipath head disk node always for
single/multi ported NVMe disk. Later we may enhance it and allow pinning the
head node for hotplug events so that head node dev name remains consistent
across disk add/remove hotplug events.
Thanks,
--Nilay
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-07 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-04 21:11 [PATCH] nvme: remove multipath module parameter Bryan Gurney
2025-02-13 20:37 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-17 8:08 ` Sagi Grimberg
2025-02-17 16:14 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 8:19 ` Sagi Grimberg
2025-02-18 14:05 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 14:57 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 15:06 ` Keith Busch
2025-02-18 16:31 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 17:15 ` Keith Busch
2025-02-18 23:06 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 23:30 ` Keith Busch
2025-02-19 14:47 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-02-20 11:05 ` Sagi Grimberg
2025-02-20 16:47 ` Keith Busch
2025-02-26 9:55 ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-03-05 14:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-05 15:17 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-05 23:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-05 23:57 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-06 0:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-06 0:15 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-06 7:12 ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-03-06 14:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-06 15:01 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-06 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-07 0:46 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-07 15:19 ` Nilay Shroff [this message]
2025-03-07 15:43 ` Keith Busch
2025-03-09 17:23 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-03-10 13:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-12 3:47 ` John Meneghini
2025-03-12 15:26 ` Nilay Shroff
2025-03-10 13:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-03-12 3:08 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 14:26 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 16:41 ` John Meneghini
2025-02-18 14:43 ` John Meneghini
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=b2c9df64-0afc-46cd-9e8d-6a3f41a4f1c7@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bgurney@redhat.com \
--cc=bmarzins@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mpatalan@redhat.com \
--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