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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1543535954-28073-1-git-send-email-jalee@purestorage.com>
 <cc7cbad6-0e7d-8328-c602-61d659c3a7de@grimberg.me> <b7b26a7a-70be-d805-ee64-67fba0b4efa8@mellanox.com>
In-Reply-To: <b7b26a7a-70be-d805-ee64-67fba0b4efa8@mellanox.com>
From:   Jaesoo Lee <jalee@purestorage.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:40:16 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJX3Cti_ZJF5E+NRuRzSeEUgaXsbA2U9C+Rh5OdYd4EMwXC1gw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-rdma: complete requests from ->timeout
To:     nitzanc@mellanox.com
Cc:     sagi@grimberg.me, keith.busch@intel.com, axboe@fb.com, hch@lst.de,
        Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>,
        Prabhath Sajeepa <psajeepa@purestorage.com>,
        Ashish Karkare <ashishk@purestorage.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

It seems that your patch is addressing the same bug. I will see if
that works for our failure scenarios.

Why don't you make it upstream?

On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 6:22 AM Nitzan Carmi <nitzanc@mellanox.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We encountered similar issue.
> I think that the problem is that error_recovery might not even be
> queued, in case we're in DELETING state (or CONNECTING state, for that
> matter), because we cannot move from those states to RESETTING.
>
> We prepared some patches which handle completions in case such scenario
> happens (which, in fact, might happen in numerous error flows).
>
> Does it solve your problem?
> Nitzan.
>
>
> On 30/11/2018 03:30, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> >
> >> This does not hold at least for NVMe RDMA host driver. An example
> >> scenario
> >> is when the RDMA connection is gone while the controller is being
> >> deleted.
> >> In this case, the nvmf_reg_write32() for sending shutdown admin
> >> command by
> >> the delete_work could be hung forever if the command is not completed by
> >> the timeout handler.
> >
> > If the queue is gone, this means that the queue has already flushed and
> > any commands that were inflight has completed with a flush error
> > completion...
> >
> > Can you describe the scenario that caused this hang? When has the
> > queue became "gone" and when did the shutdown command execute?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-nvme mailing list
> > Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme