From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] IB/srpt: Fix how aborted commands are processed Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:30:42 +0100 Message-ID: <568D1702.30904@sandisk.com> References: <568BD0FC.70207@sandisk.com> <568BD26D.9080003@sandisk.com> <20160106051305.GK15574@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160106051305.GK15574-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Doug Ledford , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 01/06/2016 06:13 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> pr_debug("Aborting cmd with state %d and tag %lld\n", state, >> ioctx->cmd.tag); >> >> @@ -1299,14 +1291,16 @@ static int srpt_abort_cmd(struct srpt_send_ioctx *ioctx) >> case SRPT_STATE_NEW: >> case SRPT_STATE_DATA_IN: >> case SRPT_STATE_MGMT: >> + case SRPT_STATE_DONE: >> /* >> * Do nothing - defer abort processing until >> * srpt_queue_response() is invoked. >> */ >> - WARN_ON(!(ioctx->cmd.transport_state & CMD_T_ABORTED)); > > Seems like this depends on your target core changes? Maybe it would be better > to respin the series to got just on top of Doug's RDMA tree, as I think > we're more likely to get this series merged for 4.5 than the target core > changes.. This series indeed depends on my recently posted target core patch series. I will rebase, retest and repost this patch series. Bart. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html