From: James Bottomley <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: "Ewan D. Milne" <emilne@redhat.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] scsi: Add intermediate STARGET_REMOVE state to scsi_target_state
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2016 09:36:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1459614980.2306.5.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <95ae7ee32dca23bb7f3ab432046fb7016b341049.1459428540.git.jthumshirn@suse.de>
On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 14:53 +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Add intermediate STARGET_REMOVE state to scsi_target_state to avoid
> running
> into the BUG_ON() in scsi_target_reap().
>
> This intermediate state is only valid in the path from
> scsi_remove_target() to
> scsi_target_destroy() indicating this target is going to be removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
> Fixes: 40998193560dab6c3ce8d25f4fa58a23e252ef38
The code and ordering is fine with me, so you can add
Reviewed-by: James Bottomley <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
However, I'd really appreciate it if the description of what was going
on was clearer for a non-SUSE distro maintainer. What we're doing is
applying a more comprehensive fix for a previously hack fixed problem
and then reverting the hack. I think message 1 should say "this
refixes the problem introduced by commit X in a more comprehensive way"
and message 2 "Now that we've done a more comprehensive fix with the
intermediate target state in patch Y, we can remove the previous hack"
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-02 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-31 12:53 [PATCH v3 0/2] Update SCSI target removal path Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-31 12:53 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] scsi: Add intermediate STARGET_REMOVE state to scsi_target_state Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-31 16:17 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-04-02 16:36 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2016-04-04 9:39 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-31 12:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Revert "scsi: fix soft lockup in scsi_remove_target() on module removal" Johannes Thumshirn
2016-03-31 16:18 ` Hannes Reinecke
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=1459614980.2306.5.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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