Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp1782088imm; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:48:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcNbEnUO0BH7nDP9d+P6GKuPeyZnAwib124D76nXLV3aLhrxeTsWguwkQS6Vvu1xyYSabyG X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:780e:: with SMTP id p14-v6mr10335487pll.239.1532011721803; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:48:41 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1532011721; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=J4B/iYcb7tqeFFDeoOR6vmvdluAHeFNLhFn2siWJJMlteMm3xSoAfJuECOssAC9KYl QxXGwELtMkyGX7NxECv4UsR09NdKA0UbMc3nIitMVmIC74Zd4LRbQlrnWqvsy8VHZhLx 7wZziBHQKf3aSnlv9wvoW4enm9+5apzgAZqohAb6rkqGKRk6LWp91iwKk8TKpMN3y32C DKhsBNqf5h35fkJjqk0QMGe9M1omEXgU+E+2c0rBHTxoEOZXCJ27LkTGMr11CJk06R4N Sqw8PYMqdXbCChM3TsCcVCuKZokeAxONX1Komf8LE1D8P+aohyuhTvB28/Dqk2vSJsa7 IGsw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=WKW/cd8nQXgMQKjLaaYWDNgpqpxpPGrdtaqC7XOtesw=; b=ClfyuMswXtizmy/Cwvu8O32TvmZvkpJl48XM3bOEPa+Lap+8axzh0Y6igNiFnthiWZ LjskWCnxavSydRYbAKcBg11neEwnaFBk45ecW1xWs0IK7dMUHqNFAULu8y4CJ80M9js0 zq5UrbQOVPN5CkI0F8ANiNd9Qw/7euRYLlKflVg7JXhfsAmkPKCrEaASf5NX+WD6pNhi gJNy5XuVIex+/ITVXjmnnhSoFclYasW4uLgn3jB47NgtQyf38jhl+OcaaLHe8RUt0rIW FRpoUog2RYPCFgqYKkVU1Lszy2uVDIp3pAMhERFsk0vlOyvxzvYHLM02sEgloqu65SXx xH4w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z1-v6si5630532plb.152.2018.07.19.07.48.25; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731837AbeGSPar (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:30:47 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:33847 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731813AbeGSPar (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:30:47 -0400 Received: by newverein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id E9F3B68D5B; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:50:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:50:05 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Johannes Thumshirn Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , Keith Busch , James Smart , Hannes Reinecke , Ewan Milne , Max Gurtovoy , Linux NVMe Mailinglist , Linux Kernel Mailinglist Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Rework NVMe abort handling Message-ID: <20180719145005.GA21000@lst.de> References: <20180719132838.15556-1-jthumshirn@suse.de> <20180719134203.GA15212@lst.de> <20180719141025.yveza2svhvc2r4lw@linux-x5ow.site> <20180719142355.GA18800@lst.de> <20180719143534.i36vo45lhz24xbrg@linux-x5ow.site> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180719143534.i36vo45lhz24xbrg@linux-x5ow.site> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:35:34PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > No with the the code following what we have in PCIe that just means > > we'll eventually controller reset after the I/O command times out > > the second time as we still won't have seen a completion for it. > > Exactly that was my intention. Which means the only thing you do for your use case is to delay recovery even further. > OK, let me see where I'm stuck here. We're issuing a command, it gets > lost due to $REASON and I'm aborting it. The upper layers then > eventually retry the command and it arrives at the target side. But so > does the old command as well and we have a duplicate. Correct? The upper layer is only going to retry after tearing down the transport connection. And a tear down of the connection MUST clear all pending commands on the way. If it doesn't we are in deep, deep trouble. A NVMe abort has no chance of clearing things at the transport layer.