From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hch@lst.de (Christoph Hellwig) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:39:40 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] nvme/pci: Poll CQ on timeout In-Reply-To: References: <1487977168-5347-1-git-send-email-keith.busch@intel.com> <20170228141017.GC20317@lst.de> <20170228160056.GA15639@localhost.localdomain> <6c0cacb0-ab91-6270-8bae-dbd18a8dbd0e@fb.com> <20170420085609.GA6217@linux-x5ow.site> <20170420142044.GB21311@localhost.localdomain> <4c3be76c-0ae3-a95a-3067-cebb9fab340e@fb.com> <8ae3cdeb-0c81-7ce9-758e-717d7955808c@grimberg.me> <20170420162855.GA25259@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20170421063940.GA6008@lst.de> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017@10:31:36AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 04/20/2017 10:28 AM, Keith Busch wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017@07:17:40PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > >> > >>>> Thanks, I forgot about this one, but still think it's a good idea. > >>>> Applied it to for-next. > >>> > >>> Agree, it's a nice addition. > >> > >> I think its harmless to have. especially when we do log that it > >> happened. > > > > It's actually proved to be quite useful and maybe good for stable. Any > > objections to roll this into 4.11 instead 4.12? > > I'll object to that, we should not queue up anything for 4.11 that > isn't potentially fixing a major issue at this point. Agreed. I'll send it to you for 4.12 with the nvme pull request later today.