[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00f501d1c657$483a74e0$d8af5ea0$@opengridcomputing.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 11:10:34 -0500
From: "Steve Wise" <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>
To: "'Sagi Grimberg'" <sagi@...htbits.io>,
"'Christoph Hellwig'" <hch@....de>, <axboe@...nel.dk>,
<keith.busch@...el.com>, <sean.hefty@...el.com>
Cc: <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Armen Baloyan'" <armenx.baloyan@...el.com>,
"'Jay Freyensee'" <james.p.freyensee@...el.com>,
"'Ming Lin'" <ming.l@....samsung.com>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/5] nvmet-rdma: add a NVMe over Fabrics RDMA target driver
>
> The above nvmet cm event handler, nvmet_rdma_cm_handler(), calls
> nvmet_rdma_queue_connect() for CONNECT_REQUEST events, which calls
> nvmet_rdma_alloc_queue (), which, if it encounters a failure (like creating
> the qp), calls nvmet_rdma_cm_reject () which calls rdma_reject(). The
> non-zero error, however, gets returned back here and this function returns
> the error to the RDMA_CM which will also reject the connection as well as
> destroy the cm_id. So there are two rejects happening, I think. Either
> nvmet should reject and destroy the cm_id, or it should do neither and
> return non-zero to the RDMA_CM to reject/destroy.
>
> Steve.
>
Hey Sean,
Am I correct here? IE: Is it ok for the rdma application to rdma_reject() and
rmda_destroy_id() the CONNECT_REQUEST cm_id _inside_ its event handler as long
as it returns 0?
Thanks,
Steve.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists