From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751609AbdJBNw2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:52:28 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:53745 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751128AbdJBNw0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:52:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 06:52:25 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Ming Lei Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, "Martin K . Petersen" , "James E . J . Bottomley" , Bart Van Assche , Oleksandr Natalenko , Johannes Thumshirn , Cathy Avery , Martin Steigerwald , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke , stable@vger.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 6/6] SCSI: set block queue at preempt only when SCSI device is put into quiesce Message-ID: <20171002135225.GF19119@infradead.org> References: <20170930061214.10622-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20170930061214.10622-7-ming.lei@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170930061214.10622-7-ming.lei@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > + /* > + * Simply quiesing SCSI device isn't safe, it is easy > + * to use up requests because all these allocated requests > + * can't be dispatched when device is put in QIUESCE. > + * Then no request can be allocated and we may hang > + * somewhere, such as system suspend/resume. > + * > + * So we set block queue in preempt only first, no new > + * normal request can enter queue any more, and all pending > + * requests are drained once blk_set_preempt_only() > + * returns. Only RQF_PREEMPT is allowed in preempt only mode. > + */ > + blk_set_preempt_only(sdev->request_queue, true); > + > mutex_lock(&sdev->state_mutex); > err = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_QUIESCE); Why is this not under state_mutex so that we guarantee it's atomic vs sdev state changes? > @@ -2964,6 +2981,8 @@ void scsi_device_resume(struct scsi_device *sdev) > scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_RUNNING) == 0) > scsi_run_queue(sdev->request_queue); > mutex_unlock(&sdev->state_mutex); > + > + blk_set_preempt_only(sdev->request_queue, false); Same here.