From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout1.samsung.com (mailout1.samsung.com [203.254.224.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEBA63BA25E for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 06:37:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=203.254.224.24 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774593455; cv=none; b=dVEeRMYpOsUnsVgkUnN264gtuwbctz1Or2TCtTxE50wnDmBAHWb06PV99hkLJMjwgUfbpqPs769XmGhus2T6Q4QXf2leZ5KYFP+IC6yVjkSUBsnzrJ4OEiF7VkepynYkNB43QkLwk1h6tM63p0EQ2UuHUfksQwwwWyskjoQZ+RQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774593455; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qWmYBof7kcqXZaGJFhox3PYJRvZy8oAyxrCoD4W/WCA=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:To:CC:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date: Content-Type:References; b=k4F80ymX19g6G8vSaAWEqZy2lLNWsL3gdwufho4D6Wna36nvmQI5meRCClLtIZnZnVGr3hxQ0YAzwWBf4oSF4gb5n5v9XPvdjASYPdQBVE9GrvhezQzgcyprOKSJ7N3n1OosiXHbg/NMl5PRDxwlYs49wKODy8ApEGRTPANylAw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b=K5oZfykv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=203.254.224.24 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b="K5oZfykv" Received: from epcas2p1.samsung.com (unknown [182.195.41.53]) by mailout1.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20260327063722epoutp01b522445e5ed6823a90bf4f8efd975ee6~gn1VbCXHW1811518115epoutp010 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 06:37:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailout1.samsung.com 20260327063722epoutp01b522445e5ed6823a90bf4f8efd975ee6~gn1VbCXHW1811518115epoutp010 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samsung.com; s=mail20170921; t=1774593442; bh=1+O6aNFLjR2fJGkRkFMDHHc6Xd1lom5HjfhLE8xyfdk=; h=Subject:Reply-To:From:To:CC:In-Reply-To:Date:References:From; b=K5oZfykvxGQYKRUaqowjfHzqKh454SqP8PZTsCS8db/DUZ402z4wQCglIdPwTHBfI FK+dN6YUkt2m7DQlbznP/TDIGQNvcxYAlHAI9hn8sEKBziC4Yl8WU+Y5CSGRca81wa 3CkQrZCrHbN9MiBEWBm98SOcbTvECGaRuidS6PeI= Received: from epsnrtp01.localdomain (unknown [182.195.42.153]) by epcas2p2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPS id 20260327063721epcas2p2c4f0a625266a14058ef94d5c52416784~gn1UtWWrK0303903039epcas2p2g; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 06:37:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from epcas2p2.samsung.com (unknown [182.195.38.210]) by epsnrtp01.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4fhrXw6mQNz6B9mD; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 06:37:20 +0000 (GMT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] nvme: Skip trace complete_rq on host path error Reply-To: hmi.jeon@samsung.com Sender: =?UTF-8?B?7KCE66+87Iud?= From: =?UTF-8?B?7KCE66+87Iud?= To: Keith Busch , "hch@lst.de" CC: Justin Tee , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "sven@kernel.org" , "j@jannau.net" , "neal@gompa.dev" , "sagi@grimberg.me" , "justin.tee@broadcom.com" , "nareshgottumukkala83@gmail.com" , "paul.ely@broadcom.com" , James Smart , "kch@nvidia.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" , "asahi@lists.linux.dev" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , =?UTF-8?B?7J207J2A7IiY?= , =?UTF-8?B?7Lm47LCs?= , =?UTF-8?B?7KCE66+87Iud?= X-Priority: 3 X-Content-Kind-Code: NORMAL In-Reply-To: X-CPGS-Detection: blocking_info_exchange X-Drm-Type: N,general X-Msg-Generator: Mail X-Msg-Type: PERSONAL X-Reply-Demand: N Message-ID: <20260327063720epcms2p43a46a694d9cda121cc804bfa2bab8d59@epcms2p4> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:37:20 +0900 X-CMS-MailID: 20260327063720epcms2p43a46a694d9cda121cc804bfa2bab8d59 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Sendblock-Type: AUTO_CONFIDENTIAL CMS-TYPE: 102P cpgsPolicy: CPGSC10-223,Y X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CMS-RootMailID: 20260320052101epcms2p42ae135da60b36685e9b7fca6849b57a6 References: <20260320052101epcms2p42ae135da60b36685e9b7fca6849b57a6@epcms2p4> <945a3e98-ee75-453c-ae80-f3c9e3e57e58@gmail.com> <20260325063333epcms2p60954532c1b65a1665bad6dcdcfd7d62c@epcms2p6> <20260326014429epcms2p135ffd3c2b2fface6423d045e9614c262@epcms2p1> <20260326065152epcms2p51a18d3bbecb6eb6dc2ddba09651e5152@epcms2p5> <20260326143124.GA17507@lst.de> On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 08:43 -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > Yeah, the spec is not very clear on their use. It just defines the codes > and a one sentence description, and then never mentioned again. I think > it allows the possibility for the controller to internally complete a > command with such status from some undefined OOB mechanism. I'm not sure > why the host needs to have their own self-generated status codes anyway > since it can already attach whatever arbitrary flags it wants to its > private data, like how we use NVME_REQ_CANCELLED. > > Anyway if a controller did return it for whatever reason, even if it is > a bug, we'd want to see it in the trace. Sorry, The date is wrong, so I send it again. On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 08:43 -0600, hch@lst.de wrote: -> On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 14:43PM UTC, Keith Busch wrote: I've confirmed what you discussed, and it seems like the approach you proposed is a better one. Can I send patch v7 as above? Regards, Minsik Jeon