From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
"Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)" <Elliott@hp.com>,
"James Bottomley (jbottomley@parallels.com)"
<jbottomley@parallels.com>,
"dgilbert@interlog.com" <dgilbert@interlog.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"Don Brace (PMC)" <Don.Brace@pmcs.com>,
"Scales, Webb" <webb.scales@hp.com>
Subject: Re: Concurrent SG_SCSI_RESET ioctls
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 03:23:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141013102339.GA8765@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543B9827.2060305@acm.org>
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:15:19AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> At least to me patches 1/4..3/4 look like nice cleanup patches. Regarding
> patch 4/4: I'm not sure yet what's the best way for addressing potentially
> concurrent SG_SCSI_RESET ioctl calls. As far as I know many SCSI LLDs have
> been implemented assuming that eh_*_reset_handler() calls are serialized per
> SCSI host. Does this mean that a mutex has to be added to avoid that an
> eh_*_reset_handler() call can be triggered via an ioctl while at the same
> time the SCSI error handler thread is invoking one of the
> eh_*_reset_handler() callback functions due to SCSI error handling ?
Both the existing code and my new code still serialize
eh_*_reset_handler callers using the crude tmf_in_progress flag. Using
a proper lock for it would seem preferable to me, as would be bouncing
the work for SG_SCSI_RESET to the EH thread.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-13 10:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-10 23:32 Concurrent SG_SCSI_RESET ioctls Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-10-11 11:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-11 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-11 22:06 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-10-14 11:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-14 16:42 ` Douglas Gilbert
2014-10-15 13:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-15 14:34 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-10-24 14:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-10-24 16:29 ` Douglas Gilbert
2014-10-11 23:04 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-10-13 9:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2014-10-13 10:23 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20141013102339.GA8765@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=Don.Brace@pmcs.com \
--cc=Elliott@hp.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=jbottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=webb.scales@hp.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