Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme: use return value from blk_execute_rq()

From: Yuanyuan Zhong <yzhong@purestorage.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me,
	axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme: use return value from blk_execute_rq()
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 11:20:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+AMecF6CODiR3sze-PAjhJ37YsjEGzM4CdKSBHxVUCMi=KwvA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210419174800.GA3130441@dhcp-10-100-145-180.wdc.com>

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:48 AM Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org> wrote:
>

> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> index b57157106cac..a0fb9ad132af 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> @@ -949,6 +949,9 @@ static void nvme_end_sync_rq(struct request *rq, blk_status_t error)
>         struct completion *waiting = rq->end_io_data;
>
>         rq->end_io_data = NULL;
> +       if (error && !nvme_req(rq)->status)
Is setting nvme_req(rq)->status for each error return in ->queue_rq()
going to gradually roll out, and eventually skipping the fallback here?

> +               nvme_req(rq)->status = blk_status_to_errno(error);
Casting int negative errno to u16 will get 0xfff., meaning NVME_SC_DNR is set.
Is that always right?

--
Regards,
Yuanyuan Zhong