On 3/4/21 03:14, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 8:52 PM Chaitanya Kulkarni
> <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 3/2/21 23:22, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>>> -void nvme_execute_passthru_rq(struct request *rq)
>>> +void nvme_execute_passthru_rq_common(struct request *rq,
>>> + rq_end_io_fn *done)
>>> {
>>> struct nvme_command *cmd = nvme_req(rq)->cmd;
>>> struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl = nvme_req(rq)->ctrl;
>>> @@ -1135,9 +1136,17 @@ void nvme_execute_passthru_rq(struct request *rq)
>>> u32 effects;
>>>
>>> effects = nvme_passthru_start(ctrl, ns, cmd->common.opcode);
>>> - blk_execute_rq(disk, rq, 0);
>>> + if (!done)
>>> + blk_execute_rq(disk, rq, 0);
>>> + else
>>> + blk_execute_rq_nowait(disk, rq, 0, done);
>>> nvme_passthru_end(ctrl, effects);
>> This needs a detailed explanation in order to prove the correctness.
> Do you see something wrong here?
> blk_execute_rq() employs the same helper (i.e. nowait one) and uses
> additional completion-variable to make it sync.
>
There is no gurantee that command will finish between call to
blk_execute_rq_nowait()
and nvme_passthru_end() is there ?
