Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 10:44:58 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@broadcom.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
        Max Gurtovoy <maxg@mellanox.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        "PDL,MEGARAIDLINUX" <megaraidlinux.pdl@broadcom.com>,
        PDL-MPT-FUSIONLINUX <mpt-fusionlinux.pdl@broadcom.com>,
        linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/13] megaraid_sas: set virt_boundary_mask in the scsi
 host
Message-ID: <20190613084458.GB13221@lst.de>
References: <20190605190836.32354-1-hch@lst.de> <20190605190836.32354-11-hch@lst.de> <cd713506efb9579d1f69a719d831c28d@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cd713506efb9579d1f69a719d831c28d@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

So before I respin this series, can you help with a way to figure out
for mpt3sas and megaraid if a given controller supports NVMe devices
at all, so that we don't have to set the virt boundary if not?