From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zhaohongjiang@huawei.com, hare@suse.com,
dan.j.williams@intel.com, jthumshirn@suse.de, hch@lst.de,
huangdaode@hisilicon.com, chenxiang66@hisilicon.com,
xiexiuqi@huawei.com, tj@kernel.org, miaoxie@huawei.com,
Ewan Milne <emilne@redhat.com>, Tomas Henzl <thenzl@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] scsi: libsas: split the replacement of sas disks in two steps
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:34:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8175f026-3b4e-27f9-2cfb-4efecbb5fe93@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5C53A7D1.5090700@huawei.com>
On 01/02/2019 01:58, Jason Yan wrote:
>
>
> 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.
ok, fine, it's just for one expander; but we still do clear that one
expanders events fully.
However we would have to be careful here to ensure that we don't have a
situation where we still have PHY events pending but no broadcast events
to trigger the revalidation and subsequent processing.
>
>> 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?
It would solve the problem of having to fixup the expanders events = -1,
which I mentioned was not so nice.
As for fixing the main problem, I was not against the idea of the other
change in sas_rediscover_dev() to not call sas_discover_new() when the
SAS address has changed.
> 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
>>
>
>
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-01 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-30 8:24 [PATCH v2 0/7] libsas: fix issue of swapping or replacing disks Jason Yan
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] scsi: libsas: reset the negotiated_linkrate when phy is down Jason Yan
2019-01-30 13:08 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 1:11 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-31 9:00 ` John Garry
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] scsi: libsas: only clear phy->in_shutdown after shutdown event done Jason Yan
2019-01-30 16:26 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 1:13 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] scsi: libsas: optimize the debug print of the revalidate process Jason Yan
2019-01-30 16:41 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 1:31 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-31 10:25 ` John Garry
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] scsi: libsas: split the replacement of sas disks in two steps Jason Yan
2019-01-30 17:22 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 2:04 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-31 10:29 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 16:38 ` John Garry
2019-02-01 1:58 ` Jason Yan
2019-02-01 9:34 ` John Garry [this message]
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] scsi: libsas: check if the same device when flutter Jason Yan
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] scsi: libsas: reset the phy address if discover failed Jason Yan
2019-01-30 17:36 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 2:13 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-31 9:10 ` John Garry
2019-01-30 8:24 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] scsi: libsas: fix issue of swapping two sas disks Jason Yan
2019-01-30 17:53 ` John Garry
2019-01-31 2:55 ` Jason Yan
2019-01-31 16:34 ` John Garry
2019-02-01 2:04 ` Jason Yan
2019-02-01 9:27 ` John Garry
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=8175f026-3b4e-27f9-2cfb-4efecbb5fe93@huawei.com \
--to=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=chenxiang66@hisilicon.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=huangdaode@hisilicon.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
--cc=thenzl@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xiexiuqi@huawei.com \
--cc=yanaijie@huawei.com \
--cc=zhaohongjiang@huawei.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