From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: swise@opengridcomputing.com (Steve Wise)
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 09:42:02 -0500
Subject: [PATCH WIP/RFC 4/6] nvme-rdma: destroy nvme queue rdma	resources
 on connect failure
In-Reply-To: <20160826143952.GB21869@lst.de>
References: <cover.1472219585.git.swise@opengridcomputing.com>
 <9f6479110ae58e72e78e37855aff3f8edb8a61e9.1472219586.git.swise@opengridcomputing.com>
 <20160826143952.GB21869@lst.de>
Message-ID: <02cf01d1ffa8$0222d1c0$06687540$@opengridcomputing.com>

> 
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016@06:50:58AM -0700, Steve Wise wrote:
> > After address resolution, the nvme_rdma_queue rdma resources are
> > allocated.  If rdma route resolution or the connect fails, or the
> > controller reconnect times out and gives up, then the rdma resources
> > need to be freed.  Otherwise, rdma resources are leaked.
> 
> I'm pretty sure Sagi tried to convince me we'd need something like this
> begfore and I tried to resists.  Sorry guys..
> 
> >  struct nvme_rdma_queue {
> > @@ -488,6 +489,7 @@ static void nvme_rdma_destroy_queue_ib(struct
> nvme_rdma_queue *queue)
> >  	struct nvme_rdma_device *dev = queue->device;
> >  	struct ib_device *ibdev = dev->dev;
> >
> > +	clear_bit(NVME_RDMA_IB_QUEUE_ALLOCATED, &queue->flags);
> 
> How about doing a
> 
> 	if (!test_and_clear(NVME_RDMA_IB_QUEUE_ALLOCATED, &queue->flags))
> 		return;
> 
> here so the the callers don't have to worry?
> 
> Otherwise this looks fine to me.

Sure.