Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:2 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:2;
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2023 14:58:57 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
Cc:     Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>,
        Kenji Tomonaga <tkenbo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] nvme: update firmware version after commit
Message-ID: <20231103135857.GA1871@lst.de>
References: <20231030160044.20355-1-dwagner@suse.de> <ZUEmlRnBVr9LGDnF@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <y32ounthrv2uuedtriy73oir5m7k5ryupzytd2x5wn436bcrj7@7xalhdepjyk6>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <y32ounthrv2uuedtriy73oir5m7k5ryupzytd2x5wn436bcrj7@7xalhdepjyk6>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 01:11:02PM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> This particular firmware seem to interpret afi one based, while
> the this patch assumes it is zero based

>   Active Firmware Info (AFI): Specifies information about the active
>                               firmware revision.
> 
>   Bit 7    is reserved.
>   Bits 6:4 indicates the firmware slot that is going to be activated
>            at the next Controller Level Reset. If this field is 0h,
>            then the controller does not indicate the firmware slot that
>            is going to be activated at the next Controller Level Reset.
>   Bit 3    is reserved.
>   Bits 2:0 indicates the firmware slot from which the actively running
>            firmware revision was loaded.
> 
> 
> It's not clear to me if afi bits 2:0 is zero or one based. Bits 6:4
> indicate to be 1 based.

All 0's based (what a stupid term..) fields in NVMe are explicitly
marked as such.  And even if that wasn't the case I'd very much
expect the same encoding for the two sub-fields.