Re: [PATCH] scsi: increase scsi device's iodone_cnt in scsi_timeout()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 8/15/22 18:43, Wenchao Hao wrote:
The iodone_cnt might be less than iorequest_cnt because
we did not increase the iodone_cnt when a command is done
from timeout.

Signed-off-by: Wenchao Hao <haowenchao@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 1 +
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
index 448748e3fba5..d21ae0090166 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
@@ -355,6 +355,7 @@ enum blk_eh_timer_return scsi_timeout(struct request *req)
  		 */
  		if (test_and_set_bit(SCMD_STATE_COMPLETE, &scmd->state))
  			return BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER;
+		atomic_inc(&scmd->device->iodone_cnt);
  		if (scsi_abort_command(scmd) != SUCCESS) {
  			set_host_byte(scmd, DID_TIME_OUT);
  			scsi_eh_scmd_add(scmd);

Not sure, but can't we still get a (late) regular completion even after the timeout happened (double accounting) and before we successfully aborted the command?


--
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Kind regards
Steffen Maier

Linux on IBM Z and LinuxONE

https://www.ibm.com/privacy/us/en/
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Gregor Pillen
Geschaeftsfuehrung: David Faller
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Boeblingen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux