linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
To: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
	James Bottomley <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
	"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid that SCSI device removal through sysfs triggers a deadlock
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:36:30 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b64c1d7-e6b4-01a9-0c6e-1d8590714595@grimberg.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14379fd1-c9bd-ad75-ca7c-0632f3e3c5d1@sandisk.com>

Hey Bart,

> The solution I prefer is to modify the SCSI scanning code such that
> the scan_mutex is only held while performing the actual LUN scanning
> and while ensuring that no SCSI device has been created yet for a
> certain LUN number but not while the Linux device and its sysfs
> attributes are created. Since that approach would require extensive
> changes in the SCSI scanning code, another approach has been chosen,
> namely to make self-removal asynchronous. This patch avoids that
> self-removal triggers the following deadlock:

Is this a real deadlock? or just a lockdep complaint?

Wouldn't making scsi_remove_device() taking single depth
mutex_lock_nested suffice here?

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-27 14:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-26 18:44 [PATCH] Avoid that SCSI device removal through sysfs triggers a deadlock Bart Van Assche
2016-10-27  9:36 ` Sagi Grimberg [this message]
2016-10-27 15:39   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-10-27  9:46 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-10-27 15:38   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-10-29  0:12     ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-10-29  2:08 ` James Bottomley
2016-10-30 19:22   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-10-30 20:25     ` James Bottomley
2016-11-03 22:27   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-11-04 13:47     ` James Bottomley
2016-11-04 18:17       ` Bart Van Assche
2016-11-07 20:51         ` James Bottomley
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-11-08  0:32 Bart Van Assche
2016-11-08  7:01 ` Greg KH
2016-11-08 15:34   ` James Bottomley
2016-11-08 15:28 ` James Bottomley
2016-11-08 16:52   ` Bart Van Assche
2016-11-08 18:01     ` James Bottomley
2016-11-08 19:13       ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-11-08 23:33         ` Bart Van Assche
2016-11-09  1:22           ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-11-08 23:44         ` James Bottomley
2016-11-09  0:57           ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-11-09  1:43             ` James Bottomley
2016-11-09  2:10               ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-11-11  1:37                 ` James Bottomley
2016-11-11  4:13                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-06-26 22:25 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=2b64c1d7-e6b4-01a9-0c6e-1d8590714595@grimberg.me \
    --to=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
    --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 \
    /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).