public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>, Arjan Van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>,
	Peter Yao <peter@exavio.com.cn>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-scsi mailing list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: smp dead lock of io_request_lock/queue_lock patch
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:01:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4006C76B.3090206@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1073914073.3114.263.camel@compaq.xsintricity.com>

Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 04:22, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
>>On Mon, Jan 12 2004, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 10:19:46AM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>
>>>>... and still exists in your 2.4.21 based kernel.
>>>
>>>The RHL 2.4.21 kernels don't have the locking patch at all...
>>
>>But RHEL3 does:
>>
>>http://kernelnewbies.org/kernels/rhel3/SOURCES/linux-2.4.21-iorl.patch
>>
>>and the bug is there.
> 
> 
> But in RHEL3 the bug is fixed already (not in a released kernel, but the
> fix went into our internal kernel some time back and will be in our next
> update kernel).  From my internal bk tree for this stuff:

"not in a released kernel..." Do I read this right? That you have a fix 
for a critical bug and it hasn't been pushed to customers yet? How about 
security bugs, has the fix you pushed in RH-9.0 been push to EL customers?

> [dledford@compaq RHEL3-scsi]$ bk changes -r1.23
> ChangeSet@1.23, 2003-11-10 17:19:54-05:00, dledford@compaq.xsintricity.com
>   drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
>       Don't panic if the eh thread is dead, instead do the same thing that
>       scsi_softirq_handler does and just complete the command as a failed
>       command.
>       Change when we wake the eh thread in scsi_times_out to accomodate
>       the changes to the mlqueue operations.
>       Clear blocked status on the host and all devices in scsi_restart_operations
> ->    Don't grab the host_lock in scsi_restart_operations, we aren't doing
>       anything that needs it.  Just goose the queues unconditionally,
>       scsi_request_fn() will know to not send commands if they shouldn't
>       go for some reason.
>       Make sure we account SCSI_STATE_MLQUEUE commands as not being failed
>       commands in scsi_unjam_host.
> 
> But, Jens is right, it's a real bug.  I just fixed it in a different
> way.  And my fix is dependent on other changes in our scsi stack as
> well.

Yes, thanks to Peter for that fix, nice that someone provides timely 
fixes...

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   CTO TMR Associates, Inc
   Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

  reply	other threads:[~2004-01-15 17:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-12 16:32 smp dead lock of io_request_lock/queue_lock patch Peter Yao
2004-01-12  9:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-12  9:19   ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-12  9:19     ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-12  9:20       ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-12  9:22         ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-12 13:27           ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-15 17:01             ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2004-01-15 17:05               ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-15 17:09               ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-15 19:30               ` Doug Ledford
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-19 21:36 Martin Peschke3
2004-03-08 21:25 ` Doug Ledford
     [not found] <1d6yN-6HH-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <1dasC-5Ww-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <1ejkf-724-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]     ` <1elvB-Jt-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-01-16 15:40       ` Bill Davidsen
2004-01-12 15:07 Martin Peschke3
2004-01-12 15:12 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-12 19:48   ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-12 19:51     ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-12 20:03       ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-12 21:12         ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-13 20:55       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2004-01-17 13:10         ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-17 16:58           ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-17 19:07             ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-17 19:17               ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-17 19:21                 ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-17 19:29                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-01-17 20:36                     ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-20  7:53               ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-25  0:31           ` Kurt Garloff
2004-01-15 17:17       ` Bill Davidsen
2004-01-17 13:12         ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-17 15:16           ` Bill Davidsen
2004-01-17 16:07             ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-12 14:07 Martin Peschke3
2004-01-12 14:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-01-12 14:13 ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-12 15:08   ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-12 15:24     ` James Bottomley
2004-01-12 15:43       ` Jens Axboe
2004-01-12 15:52         ` Doug Ledford
2004-01-12 16:04           ` James Bottomley
2004-01-12 16:05             ` Doug Ledford

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=4006C76B.3090206@tmr.com \
    --to=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=dledford@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peter@exavio.com.cn \
    /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