From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/6] Avoid calling __scsi_remove_device() twice Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 14:38:45 +0000 Message-ID: <1372689525.2385.16.camel@dabdike> References: <51CC5176.90609@acm.org> <51CC51FC.5050901@acm.org> <1372662351.2360.24.camel@dabdike> <51D12C5E.30801@acm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Return-path: Received: from mx2.parallels.com ([199.115.105.18]:35998 "EHLO mx2.parallels.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754406Ab3GAOi5 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2013 10:38:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <51D12C5E.30801@acm.org> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Mike Christie , Hannes Reinecke , Chanho Min , Joe Lawrence , linux-scsi , David Milburn , Tejun Heo On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 09:14 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 07/01/13 09:05, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 16:53 +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > >> If something goes wrong during LUN scanning, e.g. a transport layer > >> failure occurs, then __scsi_remove_device() can get invoked by the > >> LUN scanning code for a SCSI device in state SDEV_CREATED_BLOCK. If > >> this happens then the SCSI device has not yet been added to sysfs > >> (is_visible == 0). Make sure that in that case the transition into > >> state SDEV_DEL occurs. This avoids that __scsi_remove_device() gets > >> invoked a second time by scsi_forget_host(). > > > > The patch summary of this one isn't true. How about "enable destruction > > of blocked devices which fail LUN scanning" > > Hello James, > > Do you want me to repost the patch series or is this something you can > fix up ? I can fix it up, but if you repost, please change it. Thanks, James