lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before initializing procedure
From
Date
Hi Christoph and Keith

Really sorry for this.

On 01/23/2018 05:54 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:14:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> Link: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lkml.org_lkml_2018_1_19_68&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=7WdAxUBeiTUTCy8v-7zXyr4qk7sx26ATvfo6QSTvZyQ&m=xJVh7u7o8UBQko2JJRmxqldiuMhaIosNJN8WTkhAF98&s=uk1TvCGpW928A4GMJh1tvxNvPiVfgJvFjjPn69f8fNA&e=
>>> Suggested-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com>
>>
>> Why does this have a signoff from Keith?
>
The the nvme_sync_queues is from Keith in the mail thread, so I added this.
I will discard it and just reserve "suggested-by" later.

> Right, I hadn't signed off that. I just trying to get feeback if
> someting like that was closing the theoretical gap, which it does.

Yes.

>
> I actually have something similar in my patch queue I was about to send
> around this area, though. I don't like having the IO path take on the
> error handling, and I think ending unstarted requests directly will be
> better long term.
Yes.

Many thanks for your kindly response.


Thanks
Jianchao

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-23 02:44    [W:0.042 / U:15.000 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site