From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dm crypt: fix deadlock when algo returns
	-EBUSY
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:11:14 -0400
Message-ID: <20150410151113.GA16795@redhat.com>
References: <1428077387-2292-1-git-send-email-ben.c@servergy.com>
	<20150407155501.GA29040@redhat.com>
	<20150407162842.GA54137@redhat.com>
	<BA6189A5-1C3D-4A43-B494-D6FEC7200E7D@servergy.com>
Reply-To: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BA6189A5-1C3D-4A43-B494-D6FEC7200E7D@servergy.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/options/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-devel@redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel>,
	<mailto:dm-devel-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com
To: Ben Collins <ben.c@servergy.com>
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>, Milan Broz <gmazyland@gmail.com>, Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
List-Id: dm-devel.ids

On Tue, Apr 07 2015 at  1:10pm -0400,
Ben Collins <ben.c@servergy.com> wrote:

> 
> > On Apr 7, 2015, at 11:28 AM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 07 2015 at 11:55P -0400,
> > Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> It looks like you're _always_ using the completion regardless of whether
> >> crypt_convert() will be waiting (e.g. even if error is 0).
> >> 
> >> I can see this "working" but it seems less than ideal.  Would it be
> >> better to record the need to use the completion in ctx and then
> >> conditionally call complete()?
> > 
> > Actually, how about using !completion_done() before calling complete()?
> > If you think this would be OK, any chance you could re-test with this?
> 
> I'll be able to test it before Friday (out of town). Thanks

Hi Ben,

I'm still waiting for test feedback from you on v2.  Fairly certain
you'll have the same results but I'd like to be certain before pushing
this upstream.

Thanks,
Mike