We've seen a very nasty deadlock condition between the scan code and the scsi remove code, when the sdev block/unblock functionality is used. The scsi_scan mutex is taken as a very coarse lock over the scan code, and will be held across multiple SCSI i/o's while the scan is proceeding. The scan may be on a single lun basis, or on a target basis. The jist is - it's held a loooonnng time. Additionally, the scan code uses the block request queue for scan i/o's. In the case where the block/unblock interfaces are being used (fc transport), the request queue can be stopped - which stops scanning. If the same or unrelated sdev is then to be removed, we enter a deadlock waiting for the scan mutex to be released. In most cases, a background timer fires that unblocks the sdev and things eventually unclog (granted a *lot* of time may have gone by). In a few cases, we are seeing the sdev request queue get plugged, then this deadlock really locks up. One last observation: don't mix scan code and other work on the same workq. Workq flushing will fall over fast. I'd like to poll the wisdom of those on this list as to the best way to approach this issue: - The plugged queue logic needs to be tracked down. Anyone have any insights ? - The scan mutex, as coarse as it is, is really broken. It would be great to reduce the lock holding so the lock isn't held while an i/o is pending. This change would be extremely invasive to the scan code. Any other alternatives ? - If an sdev is "blocked", we shouldn't be wasting our time scanning it. Should we be adding this checks before sending each scan i/o, or is there a better lower-level function place this check ? Should we be creating an explicit return code, or continue to piggy-back on DID_NO_CONNECT ? How do we deal with a scan i/o which may already be queued when the device is blocked ? - Similarly, we need to make sure error handling doesn't take the device offline when it's blocked. scsi_eh_stu() and scsi_eh_bus_device_reset() should gracefully handle error conditions (including blocked). Right now, if a host replies with DID_IMM_RETRY or DID_BUS_BUSY, the device could be taken offline. - Anything else ? Comments appreciated.... -- james s - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
