From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: hosts resets in SRP and the rest of the world, was: Re: [PATCH 01/12] scsi_transport_srp: Introduce srp_wait_for_queuecommand() Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 04:47:18 -0700 Message-ID: <20150511114718.GA32341@infradead.org> References: <20150430093719.GA23486@infradead.org> <5542034D.5010300@sandisk.com> <554204D7.9050204@dev.mellanox.co.il> <55420AEA.10108@sandisk.com> <20150430172516.GA19200@infradead.org> <5549E600.9050208@sandisk.com> <20150511075058.GA18483@infradead.org> <55506E46.2060103@sandisk.com> <20150511093130.GA30217@infradead.org> <55507D63.6010007@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:44615 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752841AbbEKLr1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2015 07:47:27 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55507D63.6010007@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , Doug Ledford , James Bottomley , Sagi Grimberg , Sebastian Parschauer , Jens Axboe , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , Hannes Reinecke On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:58:59AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > Your proposal absolutely makes sense to me but unfortunately I do not have > the time available now to implement it. Would it be acceptable if I rework > scsi_wait_for_queuecommand() such that per-CPU counters are introduced in > blk-mq instead of one counter per hctx ? If we can't fix this for real I'd prefer to do nothing, or at least almost nothing for now, e.g. keep your original patch and ignore the blk-mq case for now.