On 05/05/15 11:45, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 5/5/2015 12:31 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 04/30/15 17:00, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 4/30/2015 2:25 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 04/30/15 11:51, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 4/30/2015 11:58 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
@@ -170,6 +170,7 @@ struct srp_rdma_ch {
struct completion tsk_mgmt_done;
u8 tsk_mgmt_status;
+ bool connected;
I generally agree with this flag, but I'm a bit confused about the
semantics of two connected flags? Also, we check the target connected
flag on TMFs, although we are executing it on a channel (should we
check both?)
I'd say keep only the channel connected flag, the target logic needs to
be mandated by the state.
I think we need both flags. The ch->connected flag is used only in
srp_destroy_qp() to verify whether a channel has been disconnected
before it is destroyed. The target->connected flag provides an easy way
to test the connected state in e.g. srp_disconnect_target().
We can just as easily check rport state. rport state is modified before
target-connected. I still think one is redundant.
Sorry but I disagree. If e.g. both the fast_io_fail and dev_loss_tmo
timers have been disabled then the rport state is SRP_RPORT_RUNNING all
the time. At least in that case it is not possible to derive the
target->connected state from the rport state.
Can't you rely on ch->connected for that?
We can keep both, but I just think that the meaning of
target->connected is confusing now.
Hello Sagi,
I will see whether I can remove the target->connected state variable.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
