From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: keith.busch@linux.intel.com (Keith Busch)
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:22:40 -0600
Subject: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce
In-Reply-To: <7239f833438701fb6ce21d819bc7042af1bc1f8a.camel@wdc.com>
References: <291a13b35af1b65fbbe99a3a9cfc7d570a620cd9.camel@wdc.com>
 <20180713235807.GA19967@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180718195650.GA20336@lst.de>
 <20180718205321.GA32160@localhost.localdomain>
 <c67f3da64914a436bc76f3ec0bc261ee6178cd14.camel@wdc.com>
 <20180718211711.GB32160@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180719131903.GB13129@lst.de>
 <20180719145931.GF32160@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180719155616.GG32160@localhost.localdomain>
 <7239f833438701fb6ce21d819bc7042af1bc1f8a.camel@wdc.com>
Message-ID: <20180719162240.GH32160@localhost.localdomain>

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018@04:04:46PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-19@09:56 -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > Even some scsi drivers are susceptible to losing their requests with the
> > reverted behavior: take virtio-scsi for example, which returns RESET_TIMER
> > from it's timeout handler. With the behavior everyone seems to want,
> > a natural completion at or around the same time is lost forever because
> > it was blocked from completion with no way to recover.
> 
> The patch I had posted handles a completion that occurs while a timeout is
> being handled properly. From https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-block at vger.kernel.org/msg22196.html:

Sounds like a win-win to me.