public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>
To: Roland Dreier <roland@kernel.org>
Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@parallels.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [SCSI] Wake blockdev queue in scsi_internal_device_unblock() for SDEV_RUNNING
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 13:08:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <513E1DB5.8040404@cs.wisc.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1361814905-7201-1-git-send-email-roland@kernel.org>

On 02/25/2013 11:55 AM, Roland Dreier wrote:
> From: Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>
> 
> If a SCSI device's old state is already SDEV_RUNNING and we're moving
> to the same SDEV_RUNNING state, still wake the blockdev queue in
> scsi_internal_device_unblock().  This fixes a case where we silently
> hang SCSI commands forever during device discovery.  One way this can
> happen is when mpt2sas is discovering a reasonably big SAS topology,
> and the sd driver has queued up a bunch of sd_probe_async() instances
> that are queueing SCSI commands to various devices.
> 
> If at the same time a SAS fabric event goes to the HBA, what can
> happen is the following:
> 
>      - mpt2sas calls _scsih_block_io_all_device() -> scsi_internal_device_block(sdev)
> 
>        (In response to some HBA firmware event like MPI2_EVENT_SAS_BROADCAST_PRIMITIVE)
>        Now sdev state is SDEV_BLOCK and blockdev queue has QUEUE_FLAG_STOPPED set.
> 
>      - Someone like scsi_add_lun() calls scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING)
> 
>        (SCSI bus scanning runs asynchronously to firmware event handling)
>        Now sdev state is SDEV_RUNNING but blockdev queue still has QUEUE_FLAG_STOPPED set

Is this a valid state change? Should it be failed in
scsi_device_set_state when we try to go from SDEV_BLOCKED ->
SDEV_RUNNING? I am not sure if it make senses to ever have a device in
SDEV_RUNNING but have the stopped queue bit set.

It used to be that scsi_internal_device_unblock called
scsi_device_set_state so the transition from SDEV_BLOCKED to
SDEV_RUNNUNG had to be a valid transition. scsi_internal_device_unblock
then started the queue. I am not sure if the sequence you were hitting
was actually a transition that was intended or just worked by accident.

Should we be failing the above call to scsi_device_set_state, and then
the call to scsi_internal_device_unblock would work as expected.

OTOH, your patch makes the block/unblock API easier to use.



> 
>      - mpt2sas calls _scsih_ublock_io_all_device() -> scsi_internal_device_unblock(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING)
> 
>        (Finishes handling the firmware event)
> 
> With the old scsi_lib code, scsi_internal_device_unblock() will return
> an error at this point because the sdev state is already SDEV_RUNNING.
> This means we skip the call to blk_start_queue() and never actually
> start executing commands again.
> 
> Fix this by still going ahead and finishing scsi_internal_device_unblock()
> even if the sdev state is already SDEV_RUNNING.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>
> ---
>  drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index 765398c..75108ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -2495,7 +2495,9 @@ scsi_internal_device_unblock(struct scsi_device *sdev,
>  		else
>  			sdev->sdev_state = SDEV_CREATED;
>  	} else if (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_CANCEL &&
> -		 sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_OFFLINE)
> +		   sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_OFFLINE &&
> +		   (sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_RUNNING ||
> +		    new_state != SDEV_RUNNING))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-03-11 18:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-25 17:55 [PATCH] [SCSI] Wake blockdev queue in scsi_internal_device_unblock() for SDEV_RUNNING Roland Dreier
2013-03-11 17:50 ` Roland Dreier
2013-03-11 18:08 ` Mike Christie [this message]
2013-03-11 18:21   ` Roland Dreier

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=513E1DB5.8040404@cs.wisc.edu \
    --to=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
    --cc=JBottomley@parallels.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roland@kernel.org \
    --cc=roland@purestorage.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