> On 22 Feb 2018, at 10.39, Matias Bjørling <m...@lightnvm.io> wrote:
>
> On 02/22/2018 08:47 AM, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
>>> On 22 Feb 2018, at 08.28, Matias Bjørling <m...@lightnvm.io> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 02/21/2018 10:26 AM, Javier González wrote:
>>>> Both 1.2 and 2.0 specs define a field for media and controller
>>>> capabilities. Also, 1.2 defines a separate field dedicated to device
>>>> capabilities.
>>>> In 2.0 sysfs, this values have been mixed. Revert them to the right
>>>> value.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Javier González <jav...@cnexlabs.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c b/drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c
>>>> index 969bb874850c..598abba66f52 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/lightnvm.c
>>>> @@ -914,8 +914,8 @@ static ssize_t nvm_dev_attr_show(struct device *dev,
>>>> if (strcmp(attr->name, "version") == 0) {
>>>> return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", dev_geo->ver_id);
>>>> - } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "capabilities") == 0) {
>>>> - return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", dev_geo->c.cap);
>>>> + } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "media_capabilities") == 0) {
>>>> + return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", dev_geo->c.mccap);
>>>> } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "read_typ") == 0) {
>>>> return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", dev_geo->c.trdt);
>>>> } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "read_max") == 0) {
>>>> @@ -993,8 +993,8 @@ static ssize_t nvm_dev_attr_show_12(struct device *dev,
>>>> return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", dev_geo->c.tbem);
>>>> } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "multiplane_modes") == 0) {
>>>> return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "0x%08x\n", dev_geo->c.mpos);
>>>> - } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "media_capabilities") == 0) {
>>>> - return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "0x%08x\n", dev_geo->c.mccap);
>>>> + } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "capabilities") == 0) {
>>>> + return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "0x%08x\n", dev_geo->c.cap);
>>>> } else if (strcmp(attr->name, "max_phys_secs") == 0) {
>>>> return scnprintf(page, PAGE_SIZE, "%u\n", NVM_MAX_VLBA);
>>>> } else {
>>>> @@ -1055,7 +1055,7 @@ static ssize_t nvm_dev_attr_show_20(struct device
>>>> *dev,
>>>> /* general attributes */
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_RO(version);
>>>> -static NVM_DEV_ATTR_RO(capabilities);
>>>> +static NVM_DEV_ATTR_RO(media_capabilities);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_RO(read_typ);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_RO(read_max);
>>>> @@ -1080,12 +1080,12 @@ static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(prog_max);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(erase_typ);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(erase_max);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(multiplane_modes);
>>>> -static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(media_capabilities);
>>>> +static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(capabilities);
>>>> static NVM_DEV_ATTR_12_RO(max_phys_secs);
>>>> static struct attribute *nvm_dev_attrs_12[] = {
>>>> &dev_attr_version.attr,
>>>> - &dev_attr_capabilities.attr,
>>>> + &dev_attr_media_capabilities.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_vendor_opcode.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_device_mode.attr,
>>>> @@ -1108,7 +1108,7 @@ static struct attribute *nvm_dev_attrs_12[] = {
>>>> &dev_attr_erase_typ.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_erase_max.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_multiplane_modes.attr,
>>>> - &dev_attr_media_capabilities.attr,
>>>> + &dev_attr_capabilities.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_max_phys_secs.attr,
>>>> NULL,
>>>> @@ -1134,7 +1134,7 @@ static NVM_DEV_ATTR_20_RO(reset_max);
>>>> static struct attribute *nvm_dev_attrs_20[] = {
>>>> &dev_attr_version.attr,
>>>> - &dev_attr_capabilities.attr,
>>>> + &dev_attr_media_capabilities.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_groups.attr,
>>>> &dev_attr_punits.attr,
>>>
>>> With the mccap changes, it should make sense to keep the capabilities
>>> as is.
>> The change adds mccap, but sysfs points to cap, which is wrong. This
>> patch is needed. Otherwise, we change the name of mccap to cap, which
>> is _very_ confusing to people familiar to both specs. We can change
>> the name of mccap to cap in a future spec revision.
>> Javier
>
> Think of the sysfs capabilities as an abstract value that defines generic
> capabilities. It is not directly tied to either 1.2 or 2.0.
I’m thinking about the user looking at sysfs and at the spec at the same time -
I myself get confused when names don’t match.
Anyway, I’ll keep it the way it was and add a comment for clarification. Would
that work for you?
Javier
