From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E392CCA47E for ; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 07:23:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239300AbiFTHXP (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2022 03:23:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58890 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239292AbiFTHXP (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2022 03:23:15 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 899E3E0BE; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 00:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id D4DB868AA6; Mon, 20 Jun 2022 09:23:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2022 09:23:10 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Hannes Reinecke Cc: michael.christie@oracle.com, Keith Busch , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, snitzer@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk, martin.petersen@oracle.com, james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] block, nvme: Add error for reservation conflicts. Message-ID: <20220620072310.GI11418@lst.de> References: <20220603065536.5641-1-michael.christie@oracle.com> <20220603065536.5641-10-michael.christie@oracle.com> <6cc818cf-fac4-d485-ea9d-0b8597f24a33@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 05, 2022 at 11:42:11AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > Well ... we tried to find a generic error for reservation failure, as we > thought that reservation failure was too SCSI specific. > And we wanted the error to describe what the resulting handling should be, > not what the cause was. Hence we ended up with BLK_STS_NEXUS. > > But turns out that our initial assumption wasn't valid, and that > reservations are a general concept. So by all means, rename BLK_STS_NEXUS > to BLK_STS_RSV_CONFLICT to make it clear what this error is about. I think think this is a good ida, but we'll need to involve the s390 dasd folks. Maybe do this as a separate prep patch? While thinking about DASD I think it would benefit from returning the blk_status_t from ->free_cp insted of the hand crafted conversion as well.