Re: [PATCH v7 1/5] lightnvm: Support for Open-Channel SSDs

From: Matias BjÃrling
Date: Wed Sep 02 2015 - 06:49:07 EST

+ /* register with device with a supported BM */
+ list_for_each_entry(bt, &nvm_bms, list) {
+ ret = bt->register_bm(dev);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto err; /* initialization failed */
+ if (ret > 0) {
+ dev->bm = bt;
+ break; /* successfully initialized */
+ }
+ }

Why just search it from head to tail? Can user specific it
in nvm_create_target()?

Hi Yang,

Currently only the rrpc and a couple of out of tree block managers are built. The register_bm only tries to find a block manager that supports the device, when it finds it, that one is initialized. It is an open question on how we choose the right block manager, e.g. a proprietary and a open-source block manager is in place. Priorities might be a way to go? or mark certain block managers as a catch all?

Hopefully we will get away with only a single or two block managers in the future, so we won't have one for each type of device.

+ if (!ret) {
+ pr_info("nvm: no compatible bm was found.\n");
+ return 0;
+ }

If we allow nvm_device registered with no bm, we would get
a NULL pointer reference problem in later using.

Yes, definitely. In the care that happens, I envision it should be possible to register a block manager after a device is loaded, and then any outstanding devices (which does not have a registered block manager), will be probed again.

As mentioned above, why we have to choose bm for nvm in nvm_register?

Without a block manager, we don't know the structure of the device and how to interact with it. I want to initialize that as soon as possible. So that layers on top can start interacting.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at