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, 9 Aug 2021 11:09:47 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Cc:     linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, yi.he@emc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-tcp: Do not reset transport on data digest errors
Message-ID: <20210809090947.luoqaooi7gc6u6yu@carbon>
References: <20210805121541.77613-1-dwagner@suse.de>
 <47ef76c6-4430-ca24-405e-a226d4303a39@grimberg.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47ef76c6-4430-ca24-405e-a226d4303a39@grimberg.me>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Sagi,

On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 12:42:00PM -0700, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> > @@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ struct nvme_tcp_queue {
> >   	size_t			data_remaining;
> >   	size_t			ddgst_remaining;
> >   	unsigned int		nr_cqe;
> > +	u16			status;
> 
> Why is this a queue member and not a request member?

I was not sure if the TCP transport specific error handling should
impact all other transport (size of struct request). Also I tried to
avoid accessing cachelines which are not already in use. Except this I
don't see there should be no problem to put this to struct request.

Daniel