On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 09:56:53AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > I think the NVMe TWG might want to consider an ECN to deprecate or at > least recommend against AUWPF, too. Yeah. A wording that every controller SHOULD implement NAWUPF if it implements AWUPF might be good, eventually upgraded to a SHALL. > Just to throw AWUPF a lifeline for legecy devices, we could potentially > make sense of the value if Identify Controller says: > > 1. CMIC == 0; and > 2. OACS.NMS == 0; and What is NMS meant to say? namespace management support? > 3. > a. FNA.FNS == 1; or > b. NN == 1 > > And if those conditions are true, then the controller and namespace > scopes resolve to a single namespace format, so the values should be one > in the same. The only way it could change, then, is a format command, > which means there couldn't be an in-use filesystem depending on it not > changing. We could. But are there many controllers where that would be the case and where people want to use atomics?
