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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d43f83cf-a3cd-df16-5af8-1f530b25d1cc@grimberg.me> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:05:04 -0700 From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me> To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de> Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Wen Xiong <wenxiong@...ibm.com>, James Smart <jsmart2021@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] nvme-fc: fix controller reset hang during traffic > On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 09:23:49AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> There still is now an imbalance, as we're always calling >> 'nvme_unfreeze()' (irrespective on the number of queues), but will only >> call 'nvme_start_freeze()' if we have more than one queue. >> >> This might lead to an imbalance on the mq_freeze_depth counter. >> Wouldn't it be better to move the call to 'nvme_start_freeze()' out of >> the if() condition to avoid the imbalance? > > What about something like nmve_is_frozen() which would avoid the tracking > of the queue state open coded as it is right? Why is there a conditional freeze?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists