[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CY4PR21MB0182F763422AFCCDB3D88361CE8C0@CY4PR21MB0182.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 23:37:17 +0000
From: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
To: Tom Talpey <ttalpey@...rosoft.com>,
Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
"linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
"samba-technical@...ts.samba.org" <samba-technical@...ts.samba.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [[PATCH v1] 23/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer to
reconnect transport
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Talpey
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 2:03 PM
> To: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>; Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>;
> linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org; samba-technical@...ts.samba.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [[PATCH v1] 23/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer
> to reconnect transport
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-cifs-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-cifs-
> > owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Long Li
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 4:11 PM
> > To: Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>; linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org;
> > samba- technical@...ts.samba.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > Cc: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
> > Subject: [[PATCH v1] 23/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer
> > to reconnect transport
> >
> > +int cifs_reconnect_rdma_session(struct TCP_Server_Info *server) {
> > + log_rdma_event("reconnecting rdma session\n");
> > +
> > + // why reconnect while it is still connected?
> > + if (server->rdma_ses->transport_status == CIFS_RDMA_CONNECTED)
> {
> > + log_rdma_event("still connected, not reconnecting\n");
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
>
> Why is this check needed?
This was used in early stage of development. It's probably not needed anymore. Will look into this.
>
> > +
> > + // wait until the transport is destroyed
> > + while (server->rdma_ses->transport_status !=
> CIFS_RDMA_DESTROYED)
> > + msleep(1);
>
> Polling!? Please plan to implement a proper handshake for connection logic.
Will look into using wait queue.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists