Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] scsi: libsas: split the replacement of sas disks in two steps

[Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>]

On 2019/2/1 0:38, John Garry wrote:
> On 31/01/2019 10:29, John Garry wrote:
>> On 31/01/2019 02:04, Jason Yan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2019/1/31 1:22, John Garry wrote:
>>>> On 30/01/2019 08:24, Jason Yan wrote:
>>>>> Now if a new device replaced a old device, the sas address will
>>>>> change.
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm... not if it's a SATA disk, which would have some same invented
>>>> SAS
>>>> address.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, it's only for a SAS disk.
>>>
>>>>> We unregister the old device and discover the new device in one
>>>>> revalidation process. But after we deferred the sas_port_delete(), the
>>>>> sas port is not deleted when we registering the new port and device.
>>>>> The sas port cannot be added because the name of the new port is the
>>>>> same as the old.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fix this by doing the replacement in two steps. The first revalidation
>>>>> only delete the old device and trigger a new revalidation. The second
>>>>> revalidation discover the new device. To keep the event processing
>>>>> synchronised to the original event,
>
> This change seems ok, but please see below regarding generating the
> bcast events.
>
>>>>
>>>> Did I originally suggest this? It seems to needlessly make the code
>>>> more
>>>> complicated.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, my first version was raise a new bcast event, and you said it's not
>>> synchronised to the original event.  Shall I get back to that approach?
>>
>> Not sure. This patch seems to fix something closely related to that in
>> "scsi: libsas: fix issue of swapping two sas disks", which I will check
>> further.
>>
>
> An idea:
>
> So, before the libsas changes to generate dynamic events, when libsas
> was processing a particular event type - like a broadcast event - extra
> events generated by the LLDD were discarded by libsas.
>
> The revalidation process attempted to do all revalidation for the domain
> is a single pass, which was ok. This really did not change.
>
> However, in this revalidation pass, we also clear all expander and PHY
> events.
>

Actually we only clean one expander and it's attached PHYs events now.

> Maybe this is not the right thing to do. Maybe we should just clear a
> single PHY event per pass, since we're processing each broadcast event
> one-by-one.
>

Yes, we can do this. But I don't understand how this will fix the issue?
We have this issue now because we have to probe the sas port and/or 
delete the sas port out side of the disco_mutex. So for a specific PHY, 
we cannot add and delete at the same time inside the disco_mutex.

> Today you will notice that if we remove a disk for example, many
> broadcast events are generated, but only the first broadcast event
> actually does any revalidation.
>
> EOM
>