We don't have a real use-case for this. Understanding the consequences,
we are questioning the patch in downstream itself.
Please ignore this patch for now.
On 12/12/18 1:36 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
scatterlist elements longer than 4GB sound odd. Please submit it
in a series with your
Hi Krishna,
Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.20-rc6 next-20181214]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
Hi Krishna,
Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.20-rc6 next-20181214]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
scatterlist elements longer than 4GB sound odd. Please submit it
in a series with your actual user so that we can help figuring out
if it really makes sense or if there is a better way to solve your
problem.
As is this patch will massively increase the memory usage for all users
of struct
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 07:25, Ashish Mhetre wrote:
>
> From: Krishna Reddy
>
> In the cases where greater than 4GB allocations are required, current
> definition of scatterlist doesn't support it. For example, Tegra devices
> have more than 4GB of system memory available. So they are expected to
On 12/12/18 12:19 PM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
struct nvme_sgl_desc {
__le64 addr;
- __le32 length;
+ __le64 length;
__u8 rsvd[3];
__u8 type;
};
Isn't this a device or protocol defined datastructure? You can't just
change it like this.
You're
struct nvme_sgl_desc {
__le64 addr;
- __le32 length;
+ __le64 length;
__u8rsvd[3];
__u8type;
};
Isn't this a device or protocol defined datastructure? You can't just
change it like this.
You're correct, we can't...
[Replied before seeing
struct nvme_sgl_desc {
__le64 addr;
- __le32 length;
+ __le64 length;
__u8rsvd[3];
__u8type;
};
in what world changing a wire protocol for this make sense?
please get rid of this hunk, NVMe will never cross the 32 bit sg element
size.
From: Ashish Mhetre
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 11:54:13 +0530
> diff --git a/include/linux/nvme.h b/include/linux/nvme.h
> index 68e91ef..0a07a29 100644
> --- a/include/linux/nvme.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nvme.h
> @@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ enum {
>
> struct nvme_sgl_desc {
> __le64 addr;
> -
9 matches
Mail list logo
