From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@puri.sm>,
Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 6/6] block, scsi, ide: Only submit power management requests in state RPM_SUSPENDED
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:25:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200831182526.GA558270@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200831025357.32700-7-bvanassche@acm.org>
On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 07:53:57PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Recently Martin Kepplinger reported a problem with the SCSI runtime PM
> code. Alan Stern root-caused that deadlock as follows:
>
> Thread 0 Thread 1
> -------- --------
> Start runtime suspend
> blk_pre_runtime_suspend calls
> blk_set_pm_only and sets
> q->rpm_status to RPM_SUSPENDING
>
> Call sd_open -> ... -> scsi_test_unit_ready
> -> __scsi_execute -> ...
> -> blk_queue_enter
> Sees BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT set and
> RPM_SUSPENDING queue status, so does
> not postpone the request
>
> blk_post_runtime_suspend sets
> q->rpm_status to RPM_SUSPENDED
> The drive goes into runtime suspend
>
> Issues the TEST UNIT READY request
> Request fails because the drive is suspended
>
> Fix that deadlock by only accepting power management requests while
> suspended. Remove flag RQF_PREEMPT.
Let me clarify this description.
Firstly, the second-to-last sentence is ambiguous. The word "only" is
all too easy to misuse through carelessness. In this case you meant
to say "by accepting only power management requests while suspended",
but what you actually wrote was equivalent to "by accepting power
management requests only while suspended". And as it happens, both
meanings are incorrect because we don't want to accept _any_ requests
while the device is suspended -- not even power-management requests.
The description should have said "by postponing all non-power-management
requests while the device is suspending, suspended, or resuming."
Secondly, the scenario described above is not a deadlock; it is a race
leading to a command failure. Namely, the thread setting q->rpm_status
to RPM_SUSPENDED races with the thread testing q->rpm_status.
Thirdly, this race is _not_ the problem that Martin encountered. His
problem was a simple bug (failure to postpone a request), not a race or
a deadlock.
Fourthly, the race illustrated above is, for now, theoretical. It
cannot occur with the existing code base (mostly because the existing
code is buggy). The advantage of your series over the patch I submitted
on Aug. 23 ("block: Fix bug in runtime-resume handling") is that it
fixes Martin's problem without introducing this new race.
Alan Stern
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-31 18:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-31 2:53 [PATCH RFC 0/6] Fix a deadlock in the SCSI power management code Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 1/6] ide: Do not set the RQF_PREEMPT flag for sense requests Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 2/6] scsi: Remove an incorrect comment Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 3/6] scsi: Pass a request queue pointer to __scsi_execute() Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 4/6] scsi_transport_spi: Make spi_execute() accept a request queue pointer Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 5/6] scsi_transport_spi: Freeze request queues instead of quiescing Bart Van Assche
2020-09-03 1:39 ` Alan Stern
2020-08-31 2:53 ` [PATCH RFC 6/6] block, scsi, ide: Only submit power management requests in state RPM_SUSPENDED Bart Van Assche
2020-08-31 18:25 ` Alan Stern [this message]
2020-09-01 5:00 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-09-01 14:50 ` Alan Stern
2020-08-31 9:09 ` [PATCH RFC 0/6] Fix a deadlock in the SCSI power management code Martin Kepplinger
2020-09-01 3:55 ` Bart Van Assche
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=20200831182526.GA558270@rowland.harvard.edu \
--to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=cang@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.kepplinger@puri.sm \
/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