On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 17:12 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 12/14/12 16:55, David Dillow wrote: > > This is much more than your original patch that Alex claimed fixed his > > issues; are you not merging two separate issues? > > > > Also, there's no reason to invoke srp_send_tsk_mgmt() if we're not > > connected or the QP is in error -- for those cases, it makes sense to > > just abort the command directly. Similarly, we should probably be > > checking the status of srp_send_tsk_mgmt() and failing -- or checking > > qp_in_error/connected again and directly aborting if we have problems. > > Hello Dave, > > Thanks for the quick reply. You might have missed Vu's message though. > Vu Pham reported that v1 of this patch did not fix the endless error > handling loop (see e.g. > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg13713.html).
I saw that, but I also saw your message asking if he was sure he was running with your patch, and I never saw a public reply to clarify. I saw a message from him yesterday that running your fixes branch did work, but with no posting of updated patches I assumed that was v1 still -- was he testing v2? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
