Re: Re: [PATCH v9 09/10] hw/nvme: add reservation protocal command

[卢长奇]

Hi,


Thank you for your support.
1. I will add a guide on how to get a simple test at next patch.
2. I think hostid is stored locally like cntlid, but I can't
find a way to get the host ID. Is it correct to get it through
qmp_query_uuid() method?

Using spdk as target will not fail, but it will show 0 at hostid
at present.

On 2024/7/15 18:09, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> On Jul 12 10:36, Changqi Lu wrote:
>> Add reservation acquire, reservation register,
>> reservation release and reservation report commands
>> in the nvme device layer.
>>
>> By introducing these commands, this enables the nvme
>> device to perform reservation-related tasks, including
>> querying keys, querying reservation status, registering
>> reservation keys, initiating and releasing reservations,
>> as well as clearing and preempting reservations held by
>> other keys.
>>
>> These commands are crucial for management and control of
>> shared storage resources in a persistent manner.
>> Signed-off-by: Changqi Lu
>> Signed-off-by: zhenwei pi
>> Acked-by: Klaus Jensen
>> ---
>> hw/nvme/ctrl.c | 318 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> hw/nvme/nvme.h | 4 +
>> include/block/nvme.h | 37 +++++
>> 3 files changed, 359 insertions(+)
>>
>
> This looks good to me, but two comments.
>
> 1. Do you have a small guide on how to get a simple test environment
> up for this?
>
> 2. Can you touch on the justification for not supporting the remaining
> mandatory features required when indicating Reservation support?
>
> hw/nvme *does* compromise on mandatory features from time to time
> when it makes sense, so I'm not saying that not having the log
> pages, notifications and so on is a deal breaker, I'm just
> interested in the justification and/or motivation.
>
> For instance, I think the SPDK reserve test will fail on this due
> to lack of Host Identifier Feature support.