On 2022/7/1 04:16, Wenjia Zhang wrote: > > > On 30.06.22 16:29, Guangguan Wang wrote: >> I'm so sorry I missed the last emails for this discussion. >> >> Yes, commit (86434744) is the trigger of the problem described in >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/45a19f8b-1b64-3459-c28c-aebab4fd8f1e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/#t ; . >> >> And I have tested just remove the following lines from smc_connection() can solve the above problem. >> if (smc->use_fallback) >> goto out; >> >> I aggree that partly reverting the commit (86434744) is a better solution. >> >> Thanks, >> Guangguan Wang > Thank you for your effort! > Would you like to revert this patch? We'll revert the commit (86434744) partly. Did you mean revert commit (3aba1030)? Sorry, I think I led to a misunderstanding. I mean commit (86434744) is the trigger of the problem I replied in email https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/45a19f8b-1b64-3459-c28c-aebab4fd8f1e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/#t, not the problem that commit (3aba1030) resolved for. So I think the final solution is to remove the following lines from smc_connection() based on the current code. if (smc->use_fallback) { sock->state = rc ? SS_CONNECTING : SS_CONNECTED; goto out; } Thanks, Guangguan Wang
