From: Wen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dust Li <dust.li@linux.alibaba.com>,
tonylu_linux <tonylu@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net] net/smc: Reset conn->lgr when link group registration fails
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 10:13:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <31d6cfe4-3f6b-98e4-1760-9f0c296f3292@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3cef644a-aeb3-ee15-9809-e560f7b24a5c@linux.ibm.com>
Thanks for your reply.
On 2022/1/3 6:52 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
> On 30/12/2021 04:50, Wen Gu wrote:
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> On 2021/12/29 9:07 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>>> On 28/12/2021 08:49, Wen Gu wrote:
>>>> SMC connections might fail to be registered to a link group due to
>>>> things like unable to find a link to assign to in its creation. As
>>>> a result, connection creation will return a failure and most
>>>> resources related to the connection won't be applied or initialized,
>>>> such as conn->abort_work or conn->lnk.
>>> What I do not understand is the extra step after the new label out_unreg: that
>>> may invoke smc_lgr_schedule_free_work(). You did not talk about that one.
>>> Is the idea to have a new link group get freed() when a connection could not
>>> be registered on it?
>> Maybe we should try to free the link group when the registration fails, no matter
>> it is new created or already existing? If so, is it better to do it in the same
>> place like label 'out_unreg'?
>
> I agree with your idea.
>
> With the proposed change that conn->lgr gets not even set when the registration fails
> we would not need the "conn->lgr = NULL;" after label out_unreg?
Yes, conn->lgr now will be reset in smc_lgr_register_conn() if registration fails.
>
> And as far as I understand the invocation of smc_lgr_schedule_free_work(lgr) is only
> needed after label "create", because when an existing link group was found and the registration
> failed then its free work would already be started when no more connections are assigned
> to the link group, right?
Thanks for your explanation. I also agree with only invoking smc_lgr_schedule_free_work(lgr)
after label "create" now. I will improve it and send a v2 patch.
Thanks,
Wen Gu
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-04 2:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-28 7:49 [RFC PATCH net] net/smc: Reset conn->lgr when link group registration fails Wen Gu
2021-12-29 13:07 ` Karsten Graul
2021-12-30 3:50 ` Wen Gu
2022-01-03 10:52 ` Karsten Graul
2022-01-04 2:13 ` Wen Gu [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=31d6cfe4-3f6b-98e4-1760-9f0c296f3292@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=guwen@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dust.li@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=kgraul@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tonylu@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox