linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	James Bottomley <jbottomley@parallels.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Joe Lawrence <jdl1291@gmail.com>,
	"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Remove two cancel_delayed_work() calls from the error handler
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 08:08:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53842BE7.5060304@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53842545.50502@suse.de>

On 05/27/14 07:40, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 05/26/2014 05:14 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
>> index f17aa7a..5232583 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
>> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ scsi_abort_command(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
>>           SCSI_LOG_ERROR_RECOVERY(3,
>>               scmd_printk(KERN_INFO, scmd,
>>                       "scmd %p previous abort failed\n", scmd));
>> -        cancel_delayed_work(&scmd->abort_work);
>> +        WARN_ON_ONCE(delayed_work_pending(&scmd->abort_work));
>>           return FAILED;
>>       }
>>
>>
> The first bit is okay, the second isn't.
> 
> The second bit is for these cases where the abort got scheduled (in
> scsi_abort_command()), but the workqueue didn't get executed by the time
> the next timeout occured.
> I know, highly unlikely, but there is no safeguarding that it _cannot_
> happen.
> So the second cancel_delayed_work() has to stay.

But how could that next timeout occur while abort_work is still pending
? The block layer removes a request from the timeout list before
invoking the timeout handler (see also blk_rq_check_expired()). This
means that no block layer timers are active after abort_work has been
scheduled and before scmd_eh_abort_handler() is called. This also means
that a second timeout can only occur after a SCSI command has been
reinserted to a SCSI device queue. And such a reinsertion can only occur
after scmd_eh_abort_handler() has started. The pending bit is cleared
from a work struct before the associated handler is invoked. This is why
I think the above cancel_delayed_work() statement is not necessary. Or
did I perhaps overlook something ?

Bart.


  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-27  6:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-26 15:12 Make SCSI error handler code easier to understand Bart Van Assche
2014-05-26 15:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] Remove two cancel_delayed_work() calls from the error handler Bart Van Assche
2014-05-26 15:15   ` [PATCH 2/3] block: Introduce blk_rq_completed() Bart Van Assche
2014-05-26 15:27     ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  7:49       ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-27  7:52         ` hch
2014-05-27  8:00           ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  8:23         ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  9:00           ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-27 10:21             ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27 10:47               ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-27 10:59                 ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27 11:13                   ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-27 11:26                     ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27 11:52                       ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-27 11:57                         ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  5:40     ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-26 15:23   ` [PATCH 1/3] Remove two cancel_delayed_work() calls from the error handler Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-26 15:25     ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  8:06     ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-27  8:09       ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  8:36         ` Bart Van Assche
2014-05-27  8:56           ` James Bottomley
2014-05-27  9:06             ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-27  5:40   ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-27  6:08     ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2014-05-27  6:22       ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-26 15:15 ` [PATCH 3/3] Make SCSI error handler code easier to understand Bart Van Assche
2014-05-27  5:42   ` Hannes Reinecke
2014-05-28 20:15 ` Joe Lawrence
2014-05-29 11:33   ` James Bottomley

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=53842BE7.5060304@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jbottomley@parallels.com \
    --cc=jdl1291@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.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).