> On Feb 6, 2018, at 8:02 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 03:32:23PM -0700, sba...@raithlin.com wrote:
>>
>> -if (dev->cmb && (dev->cmbsz & NVME_CMBSZ_SQS)) {
>> +if (dev->cmb && use_cmb_sqes && (dev->cmbsz & NVME_CMBSZ_SQS)) {
>
> Is this a prep patch for something
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 03:32:23PM -0700, sba...@raithlin.com wrote:
>
> - if (dev->cmb && (dev->cmbsz & NVME_CMBSZ_SQS)) {
> + if (dev->cmb && use_cmb_sqes && (dev->cmbsz & NVME_CMBSZ_SQS)) {
Is this a prep patch for something coming later? dev->cmb is already
NULL if use_cmb_sqes is fa
On 2/6/2018 11:48 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
Looks good,
Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg
I'll pick this one up unless someone thinks I shouldn't..
Looks good to me (I can imagine what scenario failed this :) ),
Reviewed-by: Max Gurtovoy
___
Linux-n
Looks good,
Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg
I'll pick this one up unless someone thinks I shouldn't..
From: Stephen Bates
We should not be using the CMB to determine the permissable q_depth
when we don't plan to place any queues in the CMB. In the case of a
small CMB or large numbers of queues this could lead to shallow queues
when they don't need to be.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Bates
---
driver
5 matches
Mail list logo