public inbox for stable@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>
Cc: "mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"jthumshirn@suse.de" <jthumshirn@suse.de>,
	"oleg@redhat.com" <oleg@redhat.com>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ebiederm@xmission.com" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"hare@suse.com" <hare@suse.com>,
	"jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RESEND] Avoid that SCSI device removal through sysfs triggers a deadlock
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 07:14:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180726141435.GV1934745@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4dbd740c0555eb1bfcb4181eeaca5e397b6ab63c.camel@wdc.com>

Hello,

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 02:09:41PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 06:35 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Making removal asynchronous this way sometimes causes issues because
> > whether the user sees the device released or not is racy.
> > kernfs/sysfs have mechanisms to deal with these cases - remove_self
> > and kernfs_break_active_protection().  Have you looked at those?
> 
> Hello Tejun,
> 
> The call stack in the patch description shows that sdev_store_delete() is
> involved in the deadlock. The implementation of that function is as follows:
> 
> static ssize_t
> sdev_store_delete(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> 		  const char *buf, size_t count)
> {
> 	if (device_remove_file_self(dev, attr))
> 		scsi_remove_device(to_scsi_device(dev));
> 	return count;
> };
> 
> device_remove_file_self() calls sysfs_remove_file_self() and that last
> function calls kernfs_remove_self(). In other words, kernfs_remove_self()
> is already being used. Please let me know if I misunderstood your comment.

So, here, because scsi_remove_device() is the one involved in the
circular dependency, just breaking the dependency chain on the file
itself (self removal) isn't enough.  You can wrap the whole operation
with kernfs_break_active_protection() to also move
scsi_remove_device() invocation outside the kernfs synchronization.
This will need to be piped through sysfs but shouldn't be too complex.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-26 15:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-25 17:38 [PATCH, RESEND] Avoid that SCSI device removal through sysfs triggers a deadlock Bart Van Assche
2018-07-26  1:47 ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-07-26 11:46 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-07-26 12:50 ` Jack Wang
2018-07-26 13:35 ` Tejun Heo
2018-07-26 14:09   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-26 14:14     ` tj [this message]
2018-07-26 21:57       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-30 14:13         ` tj
2018-07-30 17:28           ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-30 17:31             ` tj
2018-07-30 17:50               ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-30 17:57                 ` tj
2018-07-29  4:03   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-30 14:17     ` tj

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=20180726141435.GV1934745@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=hare@suse.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@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