From: Wei Fang <fangwei1@huawei.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>,
"jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"tyasui@redhat.com" <tyasui@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: avoid a permanent stop of the scsi device's request queue
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 14:59:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5847B355.2050100@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR02MB1683A85CB4376E9904F1B38881850@BLUPR02MB1683.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Hi, Bart,
On 2016/12/7 12:40, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> I am aware that commit 5c10e63c943b caused the behavior change. But that
> doesn't mean that a fix has to undo the changes introduced by that
> commit. We do not only want to make sure that the SCSI core works as
> intended but also that the SCSI core code is as easy to comprehend as
> reasonably possible. Adding "&& sdev->sdev_state != SDEV_RUNNING" in
> scsi_internal_device_unblock() would require a long comment to explain
> why that code has been added. I think modifying scsi_sysfs_add_sdev()
> such that it does not unblock devices will result in code that is easier
> to understand.
Agree that we should make the code easier to comprehend if possible :)
If we modify scsi_sysfs_add_sdev() as below:
...
if (scsi_device_created(sdev))
error = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING);
if (error)
error = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_BLOCK);
...
there's a chance that the state will be changed to SDEV_RUNNING.
If a SCSI device is blocked after the check of the device's creating
and before being changed to SDEV_RUNNING state, the state will still
become SDEV_RUNNING. If we fix this problem in this way, we need
introduce a way to synchronize those code.
Actually I don't know quite well about the synchronization of
scsi_device_set_state(). There are so many cases it can be called
simultaneously, will the state become a unpredictable value, or this
is tolerated?
Thanks,
Wei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-07 7:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-06 9:12 [PATCH] scsi: avoid a permanent stop of the scsi device's request queue Wei Fang
2016-12-06 15:51 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 1:20 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-07 2:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 3:41 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-07 4:40 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 6:59 ` Wei Fang [this message]
2016-12-07 16:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 16:55 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-12-07 17:40 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-07 18:16 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-07 19:24 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-07 20:09 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-07 20:30 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-07 23:43 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-08 2:28 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 2:33 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-08 3:22 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 6:38 ` Wei Fang
2016-12-08 14:04 ` Ewan D. Milne
2016-12-08 15:39 ` James Bottomley
2016-12-09 1:08 ` Wei Fang
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=5847B355.2050100@huawei.com \
--to=fangwei1@huawei.com \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=tyasui@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).