From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Bart Van Assche To: "keith.busch@linux.intel.com" CC: "hch@lst.de" , "keith.busch@intel.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "ming.lei@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 21:30:11 +0000 Message-ID: <3f0f26c5503bbe3c3222129d758aa2f85c14fb45.camel@wdc.com> References: <20180712192437.GA16839@localhost.localdomain> <7cad25b821c3a640e036f28ff1bbe51e7362d25d.camel@wdc.com> <20180713154346.GA18955@localhost.localdomain> <20180713184712.GA19419@localhost.localdomain> <291a13b35af1b65fbbe99a3a9cfc7d570a620cd9.camel@wdc.com> <20180713235807.GA19967@localhost.localdomain> <20180718195650.GA20336@lst.de> <20180718205321.GA32160@localhost.localdomain> <20180718211711.GB32160@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20180718211711.GB32160@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-7" MIME-Version: 1.0 List-ID: On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 15:17 -0600, Keith Busch wrote: +AD4- There are not that many blk-mq drivers, so we can go through them all= . I'm not sure that's the right approach. I think it is the responsibility of the block layer to handle races between completion handling and timeout handling and that this is not the responsibility of e.g. a block driver. If you look at e.g. the legacy block layer then you will see that it takes car= e of this race and that legacy block drivers do not have to worry about this race. Bart.=