linux-kernel - Re: [Suspected-Phishing]Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] nvme: split resetting state into reset

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 18 Jan 2018 11:24:47 +0800
From:   "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
To:     James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>, keith.busch@...el.com,
        axboe@...com, hch@....de
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [Suspected-Phishing]Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] nvme: split resetting
 state into reset_prepate and resetting

Hi James and Sagi

Thanks for your kindly response and directive.

On 01/18/2018 05:08 AM, James Smart wrote:
> On 1/17/2018 2:37 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>>
>>> After Sagi's nvme-rdma: fix concurrent reset and reconnect, the rdma ctrl state is changed to RECONNECTING state
>>> after some clearing and shutdown work, then some initializing procedure,  no matter reset work path or error recovery path.
>>> The fc reset work also does the same thing.
>>> So if we define the range that RESET_PREPARE includes scheduling gap and disable and clear work, RESETTING includes initializing
>>> procedure,  RECONNECTING is very similar with RESETTING.
>>>
>>> Maybe we could do like this;
>>> In nvme fc/rdma
>>> - set state to RESET_PREPARE, queue reset_work/err_work
>>> - clear/shutdown works, set state to RECONNECTING
>>
>> Should be fine.
>>
>>> In nvme pci
>>> - set state to RESET_PREPARE, queue reset_work
>>> - clear/shutdown works, set state to RESETTING
>>> - initialization, set state to LIVE
>>
>> Given that we split reset state and we have a clear symmetry between
>> the transports, do we want to maybe come up with a unique state that is
>> coherent across all transports?
>>
>> Maybe we rename them to NVME_CTRL_SHUTTING_DOWN and
>> NVME_CTRL_ESTABLISHING? I'm open for better names..
> 
> I'm leaning toward this latter suggestion - we need to define the states and the actions they take. It seems to me, that RESETTING became the "init controller" part in Jainchao's model. So maybe it's not the shutting down that needs a new state, but rather the REINIT part.
In fact, it is the nvme-pci need a new state. The "shutdown" part and "reinit" part in nvme-pci are both in RESETTING state.
But in nvme-fc/rdma, they have a RECONNECTING state to mark the "reinit" part.

So we have a SHUTTING_DOWN state to mark the "shutdown" part in nvme-pci and nvme-fc/rdma, but as James pointed out, there is a big difference in "reinit" part between nvme-pci and nvme-fc/rdma, we use a coherent name ESTABLISHING ? or separate names REINIT and RECONNECTING, for the "reinit" part.


Thanks
Jianchao