From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754833AbZGFUd5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 16:33:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753562AbZGFUdp (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 16:33:45 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.224]:30039 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753467AbZGFUdp (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2009 16:33:45 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=s9qZyfj4ahTaB4CUUSGdF5y8HWhaIoRnHiCCjX36lOdUrDR6PFuWM1OxprEqpfWPn1 9wYQLG/qmCbYgVJkocxkZu8YNgyLG/F7Cx/reoX6WnpqOSp3G3ZuYFA3inHAOdu1bQUp 2jA8IqZwMPXAcpz/aVBBGyHFCl/ajWVmSJ5ec= Message-ID: <4A525FA8.80509@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:33:44 -0400 From: "Alan D. Brunelle" Reply-To: Alan.Brunelle@pobox.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hannes Reinecke CC: Jens Axboe , scameron@beardog.cca.cpqcorp.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cciss: Ignore stale commands after reboot References: <20090702082313.F3754D340B@pentland.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20090702082313.F3754D340B@pentland.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hannes Reinecke wrote: > When doing an unexpected shutdown like kexec the cciss > firmware might still have some commands in flight, which > it is trying to complete. > The driver is doing it's best on resetting the HBA, > but sadly there's a firmware issue causing the firmware > _not_ to abort or drop old commands. > So the firmware will send us commands which we haven't > accounted for, causing the driver to panic. > > With this patch we're just ignoring these commands as > there is nothing we could be doing with them anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke Pardon my ignorance here, but don't you have a bigger problem: if the reset is not dropping or aborting old commands, doesn't this also mean that these old commands can still be _executing_? In which case any (old) reads being executed could be scribbling over memory? (Memory that may be being used for other purposes?) Alan D. Brunelle