From: Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Joe Lawrence <jdl1291@gmail.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>,
David Milburn <dmilburn@redhat.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 6/9] Make scsi_remove_host() wait until error handling finished
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 21:26:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51C8FFDB.70800@cs.wisc.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1372112866.2013.104.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
On 06/24/2013 05:27 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> However, what's the reasoning behind wanting to do this? In theory all
>>> necessary resources for the eh thread should only be freed in the
>>> release callback. That means they aren't freed until all error recovery
>>> completes.
>>
>> I think it makes it easier to handle cleanup of driver resources
>> needed
>> for aborts/resets for some drivers. If after host removal, the scsi eh
>> can call into the driver after scsi_remove_host is called then we have
>> to set some internal bits to fail future eh callback calls and handle
>> waiting on or flushing running eh operations. If we know that after
>> scsi_host_remove is called the eh callbacks will not be running and
>> will
>> not be called we can just free the driver resources.
>>
>> For iscsi and I think drivers that do scsi_remove_target it would be
>> helpful to have something similar at the target level.
>
> I'm wary of this because it combines two models: a definite state model
> (where we move from state to state waiting for the completions) with an
> event driven one (in theory the current one); such combinations rarely
> lead to good things because you get a mixture of actions causing state
> transitions some of which are waited for and some of which have an async
> transition and that ends up confusing the heck out of everybody no
> matter how carefully documented. Can you give me some use cases of what
> you're trying to achieve? Could it be as simple as an event that fires
> on release?
>
The problem that we hit in iscsi is that we will call scsi_remove_target
(we used to call scsi_remove_host when we always did a host per target
so we hit the problem at that level before). That will complete, but the
scsi eh might still be trying to abort/reset devices accessed through
that target. To avoid freeing resources that the iscsi scsi eh might be
using, we set internal state bits and wait on host_busy to go to zero
before we tear down the iscsi session, conn and task structs.
I think Bart was hitting a similar issue but a level up in the host
removal case, because srp always does a host per target and so it just
does a scsi_remove_host.
I think some driver/scsi_host_template callbacks that are called when
the host or target is released would work. At least it will for iscsi.
Will let Bart comment on srp, and we can make patches from there.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-25 2:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-12 12:48 [PATCH v11 0/9] More device removal fixes Bart Van Assche
2013-06-12 12:49 ` [PATCH v11 1/9] Fix race between starved list and device removal Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 15:38 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-24 16:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 16:23 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-24 17:24 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 17:49 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-12 12:51 ` [PATCH v11 2/9] Remove get_device() / put_device() pair from scsi_request_fn() Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 1:29 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 2:36 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-24 7:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 13:34 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-24 15:43 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-12 12:52 ` [PATCH v11 3/9] Avoid calling __scsi_remove_device() twice Bart Van Assche
2013-06-23 21:35 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 6:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 17:38 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 8:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-25 13:44 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 15:23 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-12 12:53 ` [PATCH v11 4/9] Disallow changing the device state via sysfs into "deleted" Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 1:05 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 6:35 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 17:59 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 8:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-25 13:42 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-12 12:54 ` [PATCH v11 5/9] Avoid saving/restoring interrupt state inside scsi_remove_host() Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 1:06 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-12 12:55 ` [PATCH v11 6/9] Make scsi_remove_host() wait until error handling finished Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 1:15 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 6:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 19:19 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-24 20:04 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 22:27 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 2:26 ` Mike Christie [this message]
2013-06-25 2:56 ` Michael Christie
2013-06-25 9:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-25 13:45 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 15:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-25 16:13 ` Michael Christie
2013-06-25 17:40 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-25 17:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2014-01-30 19:46 ` Bart Van Assche
2014-01-31 5:58 ` James Bottomley
2014-01-31 7:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-25 11:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2013-06-12 12:56 ` PATCH v11 7/9] Avoid that scsi_device_set_state() triggers a race Bart Van Assche
2013-06-12 12:57 ` [PATCH v11 8/9] Save and restore host_scribble during error handling Bart Van Assche
2013-06-24 1:21 ` Mike Christie
2013-06-24 2:08 ` James Bottomley
2013-06-12 12:58 ` [PATCH v11 9/9] Avoid reenabling I/O after the transport became offline Bart Van Assche
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-06-24 10:17 RE:[PATCH v11 6/9] Make scsi_remove_host() wait until error handling finished Jack Wang
2013-06-24 10:53 ` [PATCH " 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=51C8FFDB.70800@cs.wisc.edu \
--to=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=dmilburn@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=jdl1291@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).