On Thu, 28 May 2009, James Bottomley wrote: > > How so? Why not unlink the target from the host's list when the > > device_del() call returns? A new target can be created any time after > > that, since the old one is now completely invisible. > > The answer to that one is several emails back: we need the target in the > host list for the lifetime of the devices ... it's alterable, but even > more auditing. I don't recall you mentioning that the target had to be linked into the host's list for the lifetime of the devices; I thought you said merely that the target had to _exist_ for the lifetime of the devices. Does it really need to be linked, or is existence of the structure sufficient? Likewise, after a device is removed from visibility, does it need to remain linked into the host's and target's lists? > > P.S.: Does scsi_target_reap() really ever get called in non-process > > context? I couldn't find any place where that might happen. > > From the device release, which is done by last put, which could be I/O > context. But scsi_target_reap() isn't called directly from the device release. It's called from scsi_device_dev_release_usercontext(). And besides, in the patch I'm working on it isn't called from either of those places -- it's called from __scsi_remove_device(). So I'll go ahead and get rid of scsi_target_reap_usercontext(). Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
