From: "Ewan D. Milne" <emilne@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
Wei Fang <fangwei1@huawei.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: avoid a permanent stop of the scsi device's request queue
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 15:30:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1481142648.28416.244.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1481141375.2354.53.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 12:09 -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> Hm, it looks like the state set in scsi_sysfs_add_sdev() is bogus. We
> expect the state to have been properly set before that (in
> scsi_add_lun), so can we not simply remove it?
>
> James
>
I was considering that, but...
enum scsi_device_state {
SDEV_CREATED = 1, /* device created but not added to sysfs
* Only internal commands allowed (for inq) */
So it seems the intent was for the state to not change until then.
The call to set the SDEV_RUNNING state earlier in scsi_add_lun()
was added with:
commit 6f4267e3bd1211b3d09130e626b0b3d885077610
Author: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Date: Fri Aug 22 16:53:31 2008 -0500
[SCSI] Update the SCSI state model to allow blocking in the created state
Which allows the device to go into ->BLOCK (which is needed, since it
actually happens).
Should we remove the call from scsi_sysfs_add_sdev() and change the
comment in scsi_device.h to reflect the intent?
I have not verified the async vs. non-async scan path yet but it looks
like it would be OK.
-Ewan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-07 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-06 9:12 [PATCH] scsi: avoid a permanent stop of the scsi device's request queue Wei Fang
2016-12-06 15:51 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 1:20 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-07 2:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 3:41 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-07 4:40 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 6:59 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-07 16:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 16:55 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 17:40 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-07 18:16 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-07 19:24 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-07 20:09 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-07 20:30 ` Ewan D. Milne [this message]
2016-12-07 23:43 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-08 2:28 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 2:33 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-08 3:22 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 6:38 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 14:04 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-08 15:39 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-09 1:08 ` Wei Fang
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=1481142648.28416.244.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=fangwei1@huawei.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).