From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/22] IB/srpt: Fix how aborted commands are processed Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:06:43 +0100 Message-ID: <20160202110643.GE28315@lst.de> References: <56ABF16E.7070006@sandisk.com> <56ABF2A8.5060200@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56ABF2A8.5060200-XdAiOPVOjttBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Doug Ledford , Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , Alex Estrin , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org This looks good in general: Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig but I wonder if it srpt_abort_cmd wouldn't be easier to understand if t= here was just a s=D1=96ngle switch on the ioctx state instead of two? The only downside is that we might need helper variable to exectue the target core functions outside the spinlock -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html