From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sagi Grimberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] scsi_transport_srp: Introduce srp_wait_for_queuecommand() Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 13:32:55 +0300 Message-ID: <554204D7.9050204@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <5541EE21.3050809@sandisk.com> <5541EE4A.30803@sandisk.com> <20150430093719.GA23486@infradead.org> <5542034D.5010300@sandisk.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5542034D.5010300@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche , Christoph Hellwig Cc: Doug Ledford , James Bottomley , Sagi Grimberg , Sebastian Parschauer , linux-rdma , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 4/30/2015 1:26 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 04/30/15 11:37, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:56:42AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>> Introduce the helper function srp_wait_for_queuecommand(). >>> Move the definition of scsi_request_fn_active(). This patch >>> does not change any functionality. A second call to >>> scsi_wait_for_queuecommand() will be introduced in the next >>> patch. >> >> Can we take a step back here? >> >> This isn;t something driver should be doing, so we really should take >> care of this in the SCSI midlayer. >> >> Especially given that we don't maintain request_fn_active for blk-mq. > > Hello Christoph, > > How about the following: > * Modify scsi_target_block() and scsi_target_unblock(..., > SDEV_TRANSPORT_OFFLINE) such that these functions wait until > active queuecommand() calls have finished. Won't this make scsi_target_unblock a sleeping function? It might not fit all the contexts scsi_target_unblock is called.