> On Oct 11, 2018, at 12:56 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello MNC & Co,
>
> On Wed, 2018-10-10 at 11:58 -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
>> On 10/09/2018 10:23 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
>>> From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> With the addition of commit 00d909a107 in v4.19-rc, it incorrectly assumes no
>>> signals will be pending for task_struct executing the normal session shutdown
>>> and I/O quiesce code-path.
>>>
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
>>> index 86c0156..fc3093d2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
>>> @@ -2754,7 +2754,7 @@ static void target_release_cmd_kref(struct kref *kref)
>>> if (se_sess) {
>>> spin_lock_irqsave(&se_sess->sess_cmd_lock, flags);
>>> list_del_init(&se_cmd->se_cmd_list);
>>> - if (list_empty(&se_sess->sess_cmd_list))
>>> + if (se_sess->sess_tearing_down && list_empty(&se_sess->sess_cmd_list))
>>
>> I think there is another issue with 00d909a107 and ibmvscsi_tgt.
>>
>> The problem is that ibmvscsi_tgt never called
>> target_sess_cmd_list_set_waiting. It only called
>> target_wait_for_sess_cmds. So before 00d909a107 there was a bug in that
>> driver and target_wait_for_sess_cmds never did what was intended because
>> sess_wait_list would always be empty.
>>
>> With 00d909a107, we no longer need to call
>> target_sess_cmd_list_set_waiting to wait for outstanding commands, so
>> for ibmvscsi_tgt will now wait for commands like we wanted. However, the
>> commit added a WARN_ON that is hit if target_sess_cmd_list_set_waiting
>> is not called, so we could hit that.
>>
>> So I think we need to add a target_sess_cmd_list_set_waiting call in
>> ibmvscsi_tgt to go along with your patch chunk above and make sure we do
>> not trigger the WARN_ON.
>>
>
> Nice catch. :)
>
> With target_wait_for_sess_cmd() usage pre 00d909a107 doing a list-splice
> in target_sess_cmd_list_set_waiting(), this particular usage in
> ibmvscsi_tgt has always been list_empty(&sess->sess_wait_list) = true
> (eg: no se_cmd I/O is quiesced, because no se_cmd in sess_wait_list)
> since commit 712db3eb in 4.9.y code.
>
> That said, ibmvscsi_tgt usage is very similar to vhost/scsi in the
> respect individual /sys/kernel/config/target/$FABRIC/$WWN/$TPGT/
> endpoints used by VMs do not remove their I_T nexus while the VM is
> active.
>
> So AFAICT, ibmvscsi_tgt doesn't strictly need target_sess_wait_for_cmd()
> at all if this is true.
>
VMs do not remove the I_T nexus while the VM is active, so we can remove
the target_wait_for_sess_cmd() call.
-Bryant
