From: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>
Cc: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"zhaohongjiang@huawei.com" <zhaohongjiang@huawei.com>,
"jthumshirn@suse.de" <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
"hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"hare@suse.de" <hare@suse.de>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"yanaijie@huawei.com" <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
"jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"miaoxie@huawei.com" <miaoxie@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fix race condition when removing target
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 17:20:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171129162050.GA32071@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1511972310.2671.7.camel@wdc.com>
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 04:18:30PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> As the above patch description shows it can happen that the SCSI core calls
> get_device() after the device reference count has reached zero and before
> the memory for struct device is freed. Although the above patch looks fine
> to me, would you consider it acceptable to modify get_device() such that it
> uses kobject_get_unless_zero() instead of kobject_get()? I'm asking this
> because that change would help to reduce the complexity of the already too
> complicated SCSI core.
I don't think we can just modify get_device, but we can add a new
get_device_unless_zero. In fact I have an open coded variant of that
in nvme, and was planning to submit one for the current merge window..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-29 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-29 3:05 [PATCH] scsi: fix race condition when removing target Jason Yan
2017-11-29 7:41 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-11-29 16:18 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 16:20 ` hch [this message]
2017-11-29 17:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-30 1:18 ` Jason Yan
2017-11-30 16:08 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-30 16:40 ` gregkh
2017-11-30 23:56 ` James Bottomley
2017-12-01 1:12 ` Finn Thain
2017-12-01 8:40 ` Jason Yan
2017-12-01 14:41 ` Ewan D. Milne
2017-12-01 15:35 ` James Bottomley
2017-12-05 12:37 ` Jason Yan
2017-12-05 15:37 ` James Bottomley
2017-12-06 0:41 ` Jason Yan
2017-12-06 2:07 ` James Bottomley
2017-12-06 2:43 ` Jason Yan
2017-11-29 17:39 ` gregkh
2017-11-29 18:49 ` Ewan D. Milne
2017-11-29 19:11 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 19:20 ` Ewan D. Milne
2017-11-29 19:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 17:39 ` gregkh
2017-11-29 17:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 16:31 ` James Bottomley
2017-11-29 16:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-11-29 16:47 ` James Bottomley
2017-11-29 19:05 ` Ewan D. Milne
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=20171129162050.GA32071@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
--cc=yanaijie@huawei.com \
--cc=zhaohongjiang@huawei.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).