On Sat, Dec 03, 2022 at 01:02:41AM +0100, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 18:00 -0600, Roger Heflin wrote:
> > One of the Enterprise 7 variants, Claims "0.4.9" multipath but
> > appears to have a number of recent features backported, so some
> > frankensteined version.
> >
> > On Fri,
On 12/5/22 12:35, Enrico Granata wrote:
> The original definitions for these fields come from JESD84-B50, which
> is what eMMC storage uses. It has been a while, but I recall UFS doing
> something pretty similar.
> Systems that don't have a well defined notion of durability would just
> not expose
On 12/5/22 10:24, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 12/5/22 9:20 AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
>> Implement the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME feature for VirtIO block devices.
>>
>> This commit introduces a new ioctl command, VBLK_LIFETIME.
>>
>> VBLK_LIFETIME ioctl asks for the block device to provide lifetime
>>
On 12/5/22 1:29?PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:53:51AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 12/5/22 11:36?AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
Is this based on some spec? Because it looks pretty odd to me. There
can be a pretty wide range of two/three/etc level cells
On 12/5/22 11:36 AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Is this based on some spec? Because it looks pretty odd to me. There
>> can be a pretty wide range of two/three/etc level cells with wildly
>> different ranges of durability. And there's really not a lot of slc
>> for generic devices these days,
On 12/5/22 9:20 AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> Implement the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME feature for VirtIO block devices.
>
> This commit introduces a new ioctl command, VBLK_LIFETIME.
>
> VBLK_LIFETIME ioctl asks for the block device to provide lifetime
> information by sending a
On 12/5/22 9:20 AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> Implement the VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME feature for VirtIO block devices.
>
> This commit introduces a new ioctl command, VBLK_LIFETIME.
>
> VBLK_LIFETIME ioctl asks for the block device to provide lifetime
> information by sending a
On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 16:00 +0100, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Cc: Martin Wilck
> Cc: Benjamin Marzinski
> Cc: Christophe Varoqui
> Cc: DM-DEVEL ML
> Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez
Reviewed-by: Martin Wilck
> ---
> README.md | 2 +-
> libmultipath/propsel.c | 2 +-
> 2
On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 00:43 +0100, mwi...@suse.com wrote:
> From: Martin Wilck
>
> To check whether we will be able to add a given device can be part
> of a multipath map, we have two tests in check_path_valid():
> released_to_systemd() and the O_EXCL test. The former isn't helpful
> if
