linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Rework NVMe abort handling

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:04:09 -0700
From:   James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>
To:     Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Ewan Milne <emilne@...hat.com>,
        Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
        Linux NVMe Mailinglist <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Rework NVMe abort handling

On 7/19/2018 7:54 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:50:05PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> The upper layer is only going to retry after tearing down the transport
>> connection.  And a tear down of the connection MUST clear all pending
>> commands on the way.  If it doesn't we are in deep, deep trouble.
>>
>> A NVMe abort has no chance of clearing things at the transport layer.
> OK so all I can do in my case (if I want soft error recovery) is send
> out a transport abort in the timeout handler and then rearm the timer
> and requeue the command.
>
> Which leaves us to the FC patch only, modified of cause.
>

Which I'm going to say no on. I originally did the abort before the 
reset and it brought out some confusion in the reset code. Thus the 
existing flow which just resets the controller which has to be done 
after the abort anyway.

-- james