On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:04:53AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:44:33AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:34:27PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > nvme_dev_disable() quiesces queues first before killing queues. > > > > > > If queues are quiesced during or before nvme_wait_freeze() is run > > > from the 2nd part of reset, the 2nd part can't move on, and IO hang > > > is caused. Finally no reset can be scheduled at all. > > > > But this patch moves nvme_wait_freeze outside the reset path, so I'm > > afraid I'm unable to follow how you've concluded the wait freeze is > > somehow part of the reset. > > For example: > > 1) the 1st timeout event: > > - nvme_dev_disable() > - reset > - scan_work > > 2) the 2nd timeout event: > > nvme_dev_disable() may come just after nvme_start_queues() in > the above reset of the 1st timeout. And nvme_timeout() won't > schedule a new reset since the controller state is NVME_CTRL_CONNECTING.
Let me get this straight -- you're saying nvme_start_queues is going to somehow immediately trigger timeout work? I can't see how that could possibly happen in real life, but we can just remove it and use the existing nvme_start_ctrl to handle that in the LIVE state.
