[dm-devel] [PATCH v5] blk-mq: introduce BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE

[Ming Lei]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 08:22:27PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/30/18 8:21 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 20:17 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> BLK_STS_RESOURCE should always be safe to return, and it should work
> >> the same as STS_DEV_RESOURCE, except it may cause an extra queue
> >> run.
> >>
> >> Well written drivers should use STS_DEV_RESOURCE where it makes
> >> sense.
> > 
> > Hello Jens,
> > 
> > I would appreciate it if other names would be chosen than BLK_STS_RESOURCE
> > and BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE, e.g. names that directly refer to the fact that
> > one of the two status codes causes the queue to be rerun and the other not.
> > I'm afraid that the currently chosen names will cause confusion.
> 
> DEV_RESOURCE is pretty clear I think, but I agree that STS_RESOURCE
> could perhaps be better. STS_SYSTEM_RESOURCE? It makes the distinction

I guess it still can't cover all, for example, .queue_rq() may not
submit rq to hardware successfully because of tansport busy, such FC,..

-- 
Ming