[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH RFC v3 08/12] hw/block/nvme: end-to-end data protection

From: Klaus Jensen
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 08/12] hw/block/nvme: end-to-end data protection
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2021 09:21:41 +0100

On Feb 16 15:08, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 12:02:36AM +0100, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > From: Klaus Jensen <k.jensen@samsung.com>
> > 
> > Add support for namespaces formatted with protection information. The
> > type of end-to-end data protection (i.e. Type 1, Type 2 or Type 3) is
> > selected with the `pi` nvme-ns device parameter. If the number of
> > metadata bytes is larger than 8, the `pil` nvme-ns device parameter may
> > be used to control the location of the 8-byte DIF tuple. The default
> > `pil` value of '0', causes the DIF tuple to be transferred as the last
> > 8 bytes of the metadata. Set to 1 to store this in the first eight bytes
> > instead.
> This file is getting quite large. I think this feature can have the bulk
> of the implementation in a separate file. For ex, nvme-dif.c.

Yes, makes sense to split it off. I think moving[1] the device to hw/nvme
first would be good.

> But like the linux implementation this is based on, it isn't really
> nvme specific, so even better if t10 dif is implemented in a generic
> location with an API for nvme and others.

That is true, but in the absence of any interest from other subsystems
to implement this, I think we can keep it local for now? I keep a pretty
close eye on qemu-block, so if other subsystems should care about this,
I promise that I will pitch in :)

  [1]: <20210209110826.585987-1-its@irrelevant.dk>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]