On 7/7/25 08:56, Keith Busch wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 05:26:46PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> On 7/7/25 16:24, Keith Busch wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>>> We could: >>>> >>>> I. revert the check and the subsequent fixup. If you really want >>>> to use the nvme atomics you already better pray a lot anyway >>>> due to issue 1) >>>> II. limit the check to multi-controller subsystems >>>> III. don't allow atomics on controllers that only report AWUPF and >>>> limit support to controllers that support that more sanely >>>> defined NAWUPF >>>> >>>> I guess for 6.16 we are limited to I. to bring us back to the previous >>>> state, but I have a really bad gut feeling about it given the really >>>> bad spec language and a lot of low quality NVMe implementations we're >>>> seeing these days. >>> I like option III. The controler scoped atomic size is broken for all >>> the reasons you mentioned, so I vote we not bother trying to make sense >>> of it. >>> >> Agree. We might consider I. as a fixup for stable, but should continue >> with III going forward. > I think the NVMe TWG might want to consider an ECN to deprecate or at > least recommend against AUWPF, too. We should really find a way to fix this in the spec, I'll be happy to add this topic and agenda so we can discuss it at a length, before that happens option III seems right way to fix it. -ck
