From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Jej B <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
jthumshirn@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: restart list search after unlock in scsi_remove_target
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:21:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA9_cmfmzJA84VhDr582FPdrw+0uAYVKjh7zPR_zc-BSGypQzA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151019155658.GA11453@lst.de>
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 08:36:23AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Thanks for looking into this. However, I think we need a motivation in the
>> patch description why this patch does not reintroduce the soft lockup
>> documented in patch "scsi_remove_target: fix softlockup regression on hot
>> remove" (commit bc3f02a795d3).
>
> Interesting. I tried to find the original report and what state
> changes would cause an endless loop here. Dan, do you remember any
> details about this bug report?
I believe the issue I was seeing back then might have been fixed or at
least modulated by "f2495e228fce [SCSI] dual scan thread bug fix"
which came a few years later. The original problem was hot-remove
racing hot-add and that scsi_target_reap() was not guaranteed to
advance the state of the target if it was in the process of being
scanned when a removal event arrived. However the comment in that
change:
+ /*
+ * if we get here and the target is still in the CREATED state that
+ * means it was allocated but never made visible (because a scan
+ * turned up no LUNs), so don't call device_del() on it.
+ */
...is not what I was seeing. The target was in the CREATED state
because it had not yet completed the initial scan before tear down was
initiated.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-19 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-19 14:35 [PATCH] scsi: restart list search after unlock in scsi_remove_target Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-19 15:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2015-10-19 15:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-19 16:01 ` James Bottomley
2015-10-19 17:21 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2015-10-26 8:35 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-27 20:14 ` Bart Van Assche
2015-10-30 8:26 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2015-10-27 16:33 ` Johannes Thumshirn
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=CAA9_cmfmzJA84VhDr582FPdrw+0uAYVKjh7zPR_zc-BSGypQzA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.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).