From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2481EC5CFF1 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 20:36:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE8CE2089C for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 20:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=broadcom.com header.i=@broadcom.com header.b="K/3Dm0am" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CE8CE2089C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=broadcom.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934558AbeFLUg1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:36:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:39625 "EHLO mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933175AbeFLUgZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 16:36:25 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f65.google.com with SMTP id w12-v6so122152pgc.6 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:36:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=LHo7fBBHDOTFCj5I1ZWDwsAXRQe84Ak97YbUzlqS5YQ=; b=K/3Dm0amJOrn/mtbLNYpnWJdoWoNEe9AsA9Uak9Ajs7N+tznZPMtulJ4SVTcnGy/mM fhbi0OVIOOwazbLEicCNbz36HRZYJYPrr+UUcsJsdEn+hrrHBJxiJtfx6RHtDJ6z1p1w V5zVLNtcfbRsbbe0HN2Rg3neT6S9WAYpdFvGI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=LHo7fBBHDOTFCj5I1ZWDwsAXRQe84Ak97YbUzlqS5YQ=; b=g1RYLNc8OVS5JKvbBdYMoGLoZJWKe3dV+NmDVPATJyAecKa5+narCe1aYm01zc8HWn 7SiT14F+5KJH3Mrc7LjG1LF2HGJR2FeJ0/1eWqrviggQN8DaNjejIWNKBAcQhLnDjH71 OPDYjJNKSpbaaJ91vp/JlWZoC3vNrRraM8evxLgz22oPwGC8NxBzKC0qJ7E5tEfypxJq i8a/Dye1CZX2e0RwdVAaJ0/daO4n9C+MymbFErCGdzlBZDihUZxW1+ohboLpCe8hm9/2 rfCLdbwlwRqcwNQdNEp6xfePnE5N9RSqg+Tq38/A096IzoKYouDrB1R3Xhq2V3JwgQgy TzUg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E049by6C4MLDU9zZ6WlSnpNYLA75fkIoDy+F6xd2x8DE4cd641r MDLNEAld9yqr8LbvMJvVJBk8JqVE0Cs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKRk2MlQlXNfnDnoXTPcZZJOYOrXyCr8aYX//NLzvfqQxo2lfG+qzXELcf0dA/GbW45AQ7tQw== X-Received: by 2002:a65:5807:: with SMTP id g7-v6mr1582459pgr.259.1528835785165; Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.69.55.99] ([192.19.223.250]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r188-v6sm1073387pgr.78.2018.06.12.13.36.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] nvmet: use atomic allocations when allocating fc requests To: Sagi Grimberg , Johannes Thumshirn , Keith Busch Cc: Hannes Reinecke , Christoph Hellwig , Linux NVMe Mailinglist , Linux Kernel Mailinglist References: <20180515074043.22843-1-jthumshirn@suse.de> <20180515074043.22843-5-jthumshirn@suse.de> <3c91cf45-aa85-e1a5-6d25-5654131626dd@grimberg.me> From: James Smart Message-ID: <9331096f-8e5c-d029-e41c-96d5fa8b14fe@broadcom.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 13:36:22 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3c91cf45-aa85-e1a5-6d25-5654131626dd@grimberg.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/31/2018 2:31 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > > Question, why isn't tfcp_req embedded in fcpreq? don't they have > the same lifetime? > no they don't.  To properly simulate cable-pulls, etc - the host side and controller side effectively have their own "exchange" structure. tfcp_req corresponds to the controller side. The lifetimes of the two halves can differ. -- james