From: James Bottomley <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Wei Fang <fangwei1@huawei.com>, emilne@redhat.com
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
chenzengxi@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: avoid a permanent stop of the scsi device's request queue
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 18:33:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1481164381.2354.81.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5848C535.5010408@huawei.com>
On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 10:28 +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
> Hi, James, Ewan,
>
> On 2016/12/8 7:43, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 15:30 -0500, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > I think this is historical. There was a change somewhere that
> > moved
> > the sysfs state handling out of the sdev stat to is_visible, so the
> > sdev state no-longer reflects it.
> >
> > > 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?
>
> This sounds reasonable.
>
> > Assuming someone with the problem actually tests it, yes.
>
> This problem can be stably reproduced on Zengxi Chen's machine, who
> reported the bug. We can test it on this machine.
>
> The patch is as below, just for sure:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
> index 0734927..82dfe07 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c
> @@ -1204,10 +1204,6 @@ int scsi_sysfs_add_sdev(struct scsi_device
> *sdev)
> struct request_queue *rq = sdev->request_queue;
> struct scsi_target *starget = sdev->sdev_target;
>
> - error = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING);
> - if (error)
> - return error;
> -
That's it, although not the second hunk: CREATED still means device not
added to sysfs. It's just that RUNNING now doesn't mean it is.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-08 2:33 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
2016-12-07 23:43 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-08 2:28 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 2:33 ` James Bottomley [this message]
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=1481164381.2354.81.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=chenzengxi@huawei.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=fangwei1@huawei.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).