From: Mike Christie <michael.christie@oracle.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] scsi: core: Make sure that hosts outlive targets
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 11:02:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1f0fb268-fa12-7665-01ae-e19be75ddbf5@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220712221936.1199196-3-bvanassche@acm.org>
On 7/12/22 5:19 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
>
> Fix the race conditions between SCSI LLD kernel module unloading and SCSI
> device and target removal by making sure that SCSI hosts are destroyed after
> all associated target and device objects have been freed.
>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> Cc: Mike Christie <michael.christie@oracle.com>
> Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
> Cc: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> [ bvanassche: Reworked Ming's patch and split it ]
> ---
> drivers/scsi/hosts.c | 8 ++++++++
> drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c | 7 +++++++
> include/scsi/scsi_host.h | 3 +++
> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/hosts.c b/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
> index ef6c0e37acce..8fa98c8d0ee0 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
> @@ -190,6 +190,13 @@ void scsi_remove_host(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
> transport_unregister_device(&shost->shost_gendev);
> device_unregister(&shost->shost_dev);
> device_del(&shost->shost_gendev);
> +
> + /*
> + * After scsi_remove_host() has returned the scsi LLD module can be
> + * unloaded and/or the host resources can be released. Hence wait until
> + * the dependent SCSI targets and devices are gone before returning.
> + */
> + wait_event(shost->targets_wq, atomic_read(&shost->target_count) == 0);
> }
If we only wait here we can still hit the race I described right?
Is the issue where we might be misunderstanding each other that the target
removal is slightly different from the host removal? For host removal we call
scsi_forget_host with the scan_mutex already held. So when scsi_forget_host
loops over the devices we know that there is no thread doing:
sdev_store_delete -> scsi_remove_device -> __scsi_remove_device -> blk_cleanup_queue
Since the sdev_store_delete call to scsi_remove_device call also grabs the scan_mutex,
we can't call scsi_forget_host until sdev_store_delete -> scsi_remove_device has returned.
For target removal,__scsi_remove_target doesn't take the scan_mutex when checking the
device state. So, we have this race:
1. syfs deletion runs sdev_store_delete -> scsi_remove_device and
that takes the scan_mutex.
It then sets the state to SDEV_DEL.
2. fc/iscsi thread does __scsi_remove_target and it sees the device is in
the SDEV_DEL state. It skips the device and then we return from
__scsi_remove_target without having waited on that device's removal like is done
in other cases.
If the only issue we are concerned with is blk_cleanup_queue completing when we
remove the host or target, then for the target race above I think we can just use
the scan_mutex in __scsi_remove_target (that function then would use __scsi_remove_device).
If the issue is that there would be other threads holding a ref to the scsi_device
and they can call into the driver. and we want to make sure those refs are dropped
when scsi_remove_target returns then we need to do what I described in the other thread.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-14 16:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-12 22:19 [PATCH v4 0/4] Call blk_mq_free_tag_set() earlier Bart Van Assche
2022-07-12 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] scsi: core: Make sure that targets outlive devices Bart Van Assche
2022-07-13 1:33 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-12 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] scsi: core: Make sure that hosts outlive targets Bart Van Assche
2022-07-14 16:02 ` Mike Christie [this message]
2022-07-14 17:09 ` michael.christie
2022-07-12 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] scsi: core: Simplify LLD module reference counting Bart Van Assche
2022-07-12 22:19 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] scsi: core: Call blk_mq_free_tag_set() earlier Bart Van Assche
2022-07-13 1:36 ` Ming Lei
2022-07-13 8:13 ` John Garry
2022-07-13 20:04 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-07-14 12:25 ` John Garry
2022-07-14 18:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-07-15 7:54 ` John Garry
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=1f0fb268-fa12-7665-01ae-e19be75ddbf5@oracle.com \
--to=michael.christie@oracle.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.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