From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] nvmet-rdma: Correctly handle RDMA device hot removal Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 13:50:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20160804115005.GB32487@lst.de> References: <1470230393-23671-1-git-send-email-sagi@grimberg.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1470230393-23671-1-git-send-email-sagi-NQWnxTmZq1alnMjI0IkVqw@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Sagi Grimberg Cc: linux-nvme-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Christoph Hellwig , Ming Lin , Jay Freyensee , Steve Wise List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 04:19:53PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > When configuring a device attached listener, we may > see device removal events. In this case we return a > non-zero return code from the cm event handler which > implicitly destroys the cm_id. It is possible that in > the future the user will remove this listener and by > that trigger a second call to rdma_destroy_id on an > already destroyed cm_id -> BUG. > > In addition, when a queue bound (active session) cm_id > generates a DEVICE_REMOVAL event we must guarantee all > resources are cleaned up by the time we return from the > event handler. > > Introduce nvmet_rdma_device_removal which addresses > (or at least attempts to) both scenarios. > > Signed-off-by: Sagi Grimberg Looks fine, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html