Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752715AbaBXKYF (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:24:05 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35283 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751716AbaBXKYC (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:24:02 -0500 Message-ID: <530B1DAF.7010702@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:23:43 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" , target-devel CC: linux-scsi , linux-kernel , kvm-devel , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Christoph Hellwig , Hannes Reinecke , Sagi Grimberg , Nicholas Bellinger Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] vhost/scsi: Add T10 PI SGL passthrough support References: <1393219950-18613-1-git-send-email-nab@daterainc.com> In-Reply-To: <1393219950-18613-1-git-send-email-nab@daterainc.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Il 24/02/2014 06:32, Nicholas A. Bellinger ha scritto: > AFAICT up until this point the ->prio field has been unused, but > I'm certainly open to better ways of signaling (to vhost) that some > number of metadata iovs are to be expected.. Any thoughts..? Hi nab, the virtio-scsi side of the patch is nice and readable. As requested, here are my thoughts on how to add it to the standard. The ->prio field is there to mimic SAM's command priority field (8.7 in my copy of the standard). I'd rather leave it alone; I understand this is the main reason why this patch is RFC. Since we have a new feature bit, we can add a new element before the cdb. It could be a count of scatter/gather list like you did here, or it could be a byte count. Even better, we can add _two_ new fields, one for protection data out and one for protection data in. Also, do we need an equivalent of the residual field, but for metadata? Finally, any reason why you put the data sg elements before the metadata sg elements? I would have thought that processing is a bit simpler if either the metadata comes first, or you store in the command header the data count (either sg or byte). Because the virtio buffers form a linked list, it's a bit backwards to put metadata last, and store metadata count in the command header; it prevents you from processing the buffers online because you don't know when the metadata starts. Even though the Linux virtio layer always gives you a buffer count, this need not be the case in general. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/