Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 1 Mar 2021 14:26:39 +0100
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To:     Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc:     Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-tcp: Check if request has started before processing
 it
Message-ID: <20210301132639.n3eowtvkms2n5mog@beryllium.lan>
References: <20210212210929.GA3851@redsun51.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com>
 <ddf87227-1ad3-b8be-23ba-460433f70a85@grimberg.me>
 <73e4914e-f867-c899-954d-4b61ae2b4c33@suse.de>
 <20210215104020.yyithlo2hkxqvguj@beryllium.lan>
 <a2064070-b511-ba6d-bd64-0b3abc208356@grimberg.me>
 <20210226123534.4oovbzk4wrnfjp64@beryllium.lan>
 <9e209b12-3771-cdca-2c9d-50451061bd2a@suse.de>
 <20210226161355.GG31593@redsun51.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com>
 <a42d6285-ff32-3e16-b2b1-808d29f2a743@suse.de>
 <20210226171901.GA3949@redsun51.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210226171901.GA3949@redsun51.ssa.fujisawa.hgst.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 02:19:01AM +0900, Keith Busch wrote:
> Crashing is bad, silent data corruption is worse. Is there truly no
> defense against that? If not, why should anyone rely on this?

If we receive an response for which we don't have a started request, we
know that something is wrong. Couldn't we in just reset the connection
in this case? We don't have to pretend nothing has happened and
continuing normally. This would avoid a host crash and would not create
(more) data corruption. Or I am just too naive?