From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Maurizio Lombardi <mlombard@redhat.com>
Cc: hch@lst.de, hare@suse.de, chaitanyak@nvidia.com,
bvanassche@acm.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, mlombard@arkamax.eu,
jmeneghi@redhat.com, emilne@redhat.com, bgurney@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/3] Ensure ordered namespace registration during async scan
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 14:41:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aZ9sjbZ3CEW_1rW1@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260225161203.76168-1-mlombard@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 05:12:00PM +0100, Maurizio Lombardi wrote:
> The NVMe fully asynchronous namespace scanning introduced in
> commit 4e893ca81170 ("nvme-core: scan namespaces asynchronously")
> significantly improved discovery times. However, it also introduced
> non-deterministic ordering for namespace registration.
>
> While kernel device names (/dev/nvmeXnY) are not guaranteed to be stable
> across reboots, this unpredictable ordering has caused considerable user
> confusion and has been perceived as a regression, leading to multiple bug
> reports.
The nvme-pci driver also probes the controllers asynchronously, which
can also create non-determinisitic names. Is that part not a problem?
Just on the suffix part of the namespace's block handle, I have a
potential alternate suggestion here. The instance names pulled from the
ida guarantee we'll always have unique names for the lifetime of the
backing kobject. I introduced that a while ago, but I'm testing this out
now and it seems kobject_del is sufficient to reuse that name. The
driver already did that to all the objects when deleting the namespace,
so there doesn't appear to be a reason to wait for the final
kobject_put.
What I'm saying is I may have been mistaken about the naming collision
issues and we can just use the head's ns_id to get a consistent and
meaningful name based off the backing namespaces. There's some unlikely
races with multipath at the moment if we did use ns_id, but I think
they're all fixable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-25 21:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-25 16:12 [PATCH V3 0/3] Ensure ordered namespace registration during async scan Maurizio Lombardi
2026-02-25 16:12 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] lib: Introduce completion chain helper Maurizio Lombardi
2026-02-25 16:12 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] nvme-core: register namespaces in order during async scan Maurizio Lombardi
2026-02-25 21:37 ` kernel test robot
2026-02-25 16:12 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] scsi: Convert async scanning to use the completion chain helper Maurizio Lombardi
2026-02-25 21:41 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2026-02-26 8:07 ` [PATCH V3 0/3] Ensure ordered namespace registration during async scan Maurizio Lombardi
2026-02-26 15:09 ` Keith Busch
2026-02-26 16:35 ` John Meneghini
2026-02-26 18:15 ` Keith Busch
2026-03-02 7:16 ` Hannes Reinecke
2026-03-02 17:12 ` Keith Busch
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=aZ9sjbZ3CEW_1rW1@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=bgurney@redhat.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlombard@arkamax.eu \
--cc=mlombard@redhat.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