From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCH] sd: use async_probe cookie to avoid deadlocks Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:30:45 +0000 Message-ID: <1490103027.2602.5.camel@sandisk.com> References: <1490098475-21884-1-git-send-email-hare@suse.de> <1490101519.2412.13.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from esa3.hgst.iphmx.com ([216.71.153.141]:55607 "EHLO esa3.hgst.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756870AbdCUNax (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:30:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1490101519.2412.13.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: <8EF6C21875B16648AAECE416D2C98C61@sandisk.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com" , "hare@suse.de" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "hck@suse.de" , "hare@suse.com" On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 09:05 -0400, James Bottomley wrote: > How does this preserve ordering? It looks like you have one cookie per > sdkp ... is there some sort of ordering guarantee I'm not seeing? Hello James, Since the probe order depends on the order in which __async_probe() adds entries to the "pending" list, and since the order of the __async_probe() calls is not changed by this patch, shouldn't the probe order be preserved by this patch? Thanks, Bart.=