On Fri, 2015-04-24 at 09:25 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.k...@hp.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 21:35 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > >> Most configuration of the nd-subsystem is done via nd-sysfs. However, > >> the NFIT specification defines a small set of messages that can be > >> passed to the subsystem via platform-firmware-defined methods. The > >> command set (as of the current version of the NFIT-DSM spec) is: > >> > >> NFIT_CMD_SMART: media health and diagnostics > >> NFIT_CMD_GET_CONFIG_SIZE: size of the label space > >> NFIT_CMD_GET_CONFIG_DATA: read label > >> NFIT_CMD_SET_CONFIG_DATA: write label > >> NFIT_CMD_VENDOR: vendor-specific command passthrough > >> NFIT_CMD_ARS_CAP: report address-range-scrubbing capabilities > >> NFIT_CMD_START_ARS: initiate scrubbing > >> NFIT_CMD_QUERY_ARS: report on scrubbing state > >> NFIT_CMD_SMART_THRESHOLD: configure alarm thresholds for smart events > > > > "nd/bus.c" provides two features, 1) the top level ND bus driver which > > is the central part of the ND, and 2) the ioctl interface specific to > > the example-DSM-interface. I think the example-DSM-specific part should > > be put into an example-DSM-support module, so that the ND can support > > other _DSMs as necessary. Also, _DSM needs to be handled as optional. > > I don't think it needs to be separated, they'll both end up using the > same infrastructure just with different UUIDs on the ACPI device > interface or different format-interface-codes. A firmware > implementation is also free to disable individual DSMs (see > nd_acpi_add_dimm).
Well, ioctl cmd# is essentially func# of the _DSM, and each cmd structure needs to match with its _DSM output data structure. So, I do not think these cmds will work for other _DSMs. That said, the ND is complex enough already, and we should not make it more complicated for the initial version... So, how about changing the name of /dev/ndctl0 to indicate RFIC 0x0201, ex. /dev/nd0201ctl0? That should allow separate ioctl()s for other RFICs. The code can be updated when other _DSM actually needs to be supported by the ND. > That said, you're right, we do need a fix to allow > PMEM from DIMMs without DSMs to activate. Great! Thanks, -Toshi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
