From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target()
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:09:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mqdoagh5sdu.fsf@c203.arch.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151002124903.GA11987@infradead.org> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:49:03 -0700")
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:
>> - list_for_each_entry(starget, &shost->__targets, siblings) {
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(starget, tmp, &shost->__targets, siblings) {
>> if (starget->state == STARGET_DEL)
>> continue;
>> if (starget->dev.parent == dev || &starget->dev == dev) {
>> /* assuming new targets arrive at the end */
>
> Now that the last variable is gone this comments isn't needed.
Yep, you're right. I'll remove it.
>
>> kref_get(&starget->reap_ref);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
>> - if (last)
>> - scsi_target_reap(last);
>> - last = starget;
>> +
>> __scsi_remove_target(starget);
>> + list_move_tail(&starget->siblings, &reap_list);
>> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
>> }
>
> What makes the list_move save after dropping host_lock? I think this
> needs to be changed to not drop the host_lock and change
> __scsi_remove_target to expect host_lock held to be safe.
Having the list_move() outside of the host_lock was purely by
accident. Interestingly the stressing didn't mind it. But yes you're
right, __scsi_remove_target() should be made host_lock() save for being
called under the host_lock.
Regarding the list move, does it look OK for you (i.e. do we still need
it after reworking __scsi_remove_target())? IMHO yes, but I only have
half a year of experience in this area).
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target()
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 15:09:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mqdoagh5sdu.fsf@c203.arch.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151002124903.GA11987@infradead.org> (Christoph Hellwig's message of "Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:49:03 -0700")
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> writes:
>> - list_for_each_entry(starget, &shost->__targets, siblings) {
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(starget, tmp, &shost->__targets, siblings) {
>> if (starget->state == STARGET_DEL)
>> continue;
>> if (starget->dev.parent == dev || &starget->dev == dev) {
>> /* assuming new targets arrive at the end */
>
> Now that the last variable is gone this comments isn't needed.
Yep, you're right. I'll remove it.
>
>> kref_get(&starget->reap_ref);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
>> - if (last)
>> - scsi_target_reap(last);
>> - last = starget;
>> +
>> __scsi_remove_target(starget);
>> + list_move_tail(&starget->siblings, &reap_list);
>> spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
>> }
>
> What makes the list_move save after dropping host_lock? I think this
> needs to be changed to not drop the host_lock and change
> __scsi_remove_target to expect host_lock held to be safe.
Having the list_move() outside of the host_lock was purely by
accident. Interestingly the stressing didn't mind it. But yes you're
right, __scsi_remove_target() should be made host_lock() save for being
called under the host_lock.
Regarding the list move, does it look OK for you (i.e. do we still need
it after reworking __scsi_remove_target())? IMHO yes, but I only have
half a year of experience in this area).
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-02 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-02 8:21 [PATCH] SCSI: Fix hard lockup in scsi_remove_target() Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-02 8:25 ` Hannes Reinecke
2015-10-02 12:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-02 13:09 ` Johannes Thumshirn [this message]
2015-10-02 13:09 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-02 13:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=mqdoagh5sdu.fsf@c203.arch.suse.de \
--to=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.