On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:18:17AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 06:28:15PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > > >> I think we need the NVME_CTRL_SCHED_RESET state. In fact I'm pretty > >> sure some time in the past I already had it in a local tree as a > >> generalization of rdma and loop already use NVME_CTRL_RESETTING > >> (they set it before queueing the reset work). > > > > I don't remember having it, but I might be wrong... > > > > Can you explain again why you think we need it? Sorry for being > > difficult, but I'm not exactly sure why it makes things better > > or simpler. > > Motly that we can treat a controller as under reset before scheduling > the reset work, both to prevent multiple schedules, and to make > checks like the one in nvme_should_reset robus. > > But I think something along the lines of the earlier patch from > Rakesh that just sets the RESETTING state earlier + the cancel_work_sync > suggested by you should also work for that purpose. So maybe that's > the way to go after all.
I would post a new patch which includes my RESETTING state earlier patch + the cancel_work_sync which Sagi suggested after testing. Sagi: Because my RESETTING patch earlier is subset of your untested patch with cancel_work_sync, it would be logical to take a signed off from you as well. May you review/ack/nack the patch? Feel free to let me know if you want me to change it further or instead you want to post as author. I am okay with either as long as we fix the issue.
