From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch)
Subject: [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before initializing procedure
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:54:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180122215436.GS12043@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180122201423.GA30427@lst.de>
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018@09:14:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/19/68
> > Suggested-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang at oracle.com>
>
> Why does this have a signoff from Keith?
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.
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.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com>,
axboe@fb.com, sagi@grimberg.me, maxg@mellanox.com,
james.smart@broadcom.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before initializing procedure
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:54:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180122215436.GS12043@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180122201423.GA30427@lst.de>
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:14:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/19/68
> > 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?
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.
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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-22 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-22 7:53 [PATCH] nvme-pci: ensure nvme_timeout complete before initializing procedure Jianchao Wang
2018-01-22 7:53 ` Jianchao Wang
2018-01-22 20:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-01-22 20:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-01-22 21:54 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2018-01-22 21:54 ` Keith Busch
2018-01-23 1:43 ` jianchao.wang
2018-01-23 1:43 ` jianchao.wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180122215436.GS12043@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.