From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: hck@suse.de, Bart van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sd: use async_probe cookie to avoid deadlocks
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:25:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <27545016-e3a6-e425-cdfb-42c3ac7128df@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1490101519.2412.13.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On 03/21/2017 02:05 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 13:14 +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> With the current design we're waiting for all async probes to
>> finish when removing any sd device.
>> This might lead to a livelock where the 'remove' call is blocking
>> for any probe calls to finish, and the probe calls are waiting for
>> a response, which will never be processes as the thread handling
>> the responses is waiting for the remove call to finish.
>> Which is completely pointless as we only _really_ care for the
>> probe on _this_ device to be completed; any other probing can
>> happily continue for all we care.
>> So save the async probing cookie in the structure and only wait
>> if this specific probe is still active.
>
> 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?
>
Do we need one?
The only thing we care here is that probing for _this_ device has finished.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-21 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-21 12:14 [PATCH] sd: use async_probe cookie to avoid deadlocks Hannes Reinecke
2017-03-21 13:02 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-21 13:05 ` James Bottomley
2017-03-21 13:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-21 13:33 ` James Bottomley
2017-03-21 13:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-03-21 15:32 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-03-21 15:25 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2017-03-21 15:33 ` James Bottomley
2017-03-21 16:21 ` Hannes Reinecke
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=27545016-e3a6-e425-cdfb-42c3ac7128df@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=hck@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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